Anti-Vaxxers Are Cool with Dying Young

Brosef

I respect O.G. knowledge
Supporter
Joined
Jun 10, 2012
Messages
7,458
Reputation
2,770
Daps
36,836
Reppin
T-Dot
Replace hundreds of years of medical research with advice from playboy playmates and TV slores, brehs.

Dear Anti-Vaxxers: You Want Pure Nature? OK, Die Young.

salk.jpg


Parents who oppose vaccines are not only misinformed, they're spoiled, having grown up in a world that stands behind the berms built by the scientists and vaccine developers who came before them.

None of the New York parents who are refusing to vaccinate their children today were around the city in the summer of 1916, which is good for them and good for any of the kids they might have had. It was in that summer that 27,000 children nationwide were struck by a polio outbreak, 9,300 of them in New York. Of those 9,300 victims, 2,700 died. The Salk family at 116th St. and Madison Ave. escaped the scourge, meaning that their two-year-old son Jonas was spared. History notes that when he grew up, he had a little score-settling to do with the poliovirus.

But here’s the thing the anti-vaxxers need to know, for the one billionth time: You’re wrong. Really, it’s that simple. You’re trafficking in junk science, in thoroughly debunked science, in the dizzy stuff of rumor mills and conspiracy theories. And about nature? “Messing with nature” is the whole point of medicine, given that it’s nature that cooked up every disease that ever existed. You want pure nature? OK, die young.

‘Messing with nature’ is the whole point of medicine, given that it’s nature that cooked up every disease that ever existed.That hard experience of a city and its people makes the sublime obtuseness, recklessness and flat-out numbskullery of some of today’s New York parents entirely indefensible. A deeply disturbing investigative piece in New York magazine reveals that fully 245 of the city’s private schools have vaccination rates that fall below the 95% level needed to ensure herd immunity — the protection that’s provided to the few unvaccinated members of a community because so many others are protected that a pathogen never gets a foothold. Of those schools, 127 fall below 90% and 37 fall below 70%. Nine schools fall in a dismal range of 18.4% to 41.5%. Numbers like that are the leading cause New York is suddenly suffering a measles outbreak, more than 50 years after the first vaccine against the disease was licensed.

The anti-vaxxers all cite the same imaginary problems to support their resistance: Vaccines are linked to autism (they’re not), they cause autoimmune diseases (they don’t), they are “messing with nature,” as one pediatrician in a Marin County, Calif. practice that indulges parents who don’t want to vaccinate their kids or want to administer the shots on their own schedule, told Mother Jones Magazine. Um, OK.


The authorities cited by the warring camps ought to settle the matter all by themselves. On one side we have the likes of Jenny McCarthy and Kristin Cavallari. Nothing wrong with naked models, TV hosts, and fashion designers, but they’re not, you know, scientists. On the other side we have the World Health Organization, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, UNICEF, the Gates Foundation, the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and virtually every serious medical journal on the planet.

So anti-vaxxers, you lose. Or actually, your kids lose.

Parents who oppose vaccines are not only misinformed, they’re spoiled, having grown up in a world that stands behind the berms built by the scientists and vaccine developers who came before them. If you’ve never seen measles — or polio or whooping cough or mumps — you have the luxury of believing they don’t exist.

“We live in a very healthy community,” said one of the sublimely glib doctors cited in the Mother Jones story. “The incidence of these diseases are very low, not only here but nationwide. And so it’s safe to do a modified vaccine schedule, in my opinion.”

But the incidence of these diseases is very low precisely because most doctors and parents don’t think the way you do and do vaccinate on schedule. “We live in a very dry community,” the doctor might as well have said. “So it’s safe not to maintain the levees and flood walls that have protected us until now, in my opinion.”

And so you drown; and so unvaccinated children get sick. The words “in my opinion” are not themselves some kind of rhetorical vaccine. They can, instead, be the pathogen. Like all pathogens, they can kill.

http://time.com/46914/vaccine-opponents-wrong/
 

newworldafro

DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
51,421
Reputation
5,343
Daps
115,998
Reppin
In the Silver Lining
I think most people respect the concept of vaccines.....they get the science.

What people might have an issue with is and what gets mixed up in the media is what other chemicals are going into the vaccines ....... that ... just a hunch... maybe shouldn't be there... :ld: ......

That's where contention comes into play....
 

Brosef

I respect O.G. knowledge
Supporter
Joined
Jun 10, 2012
Messages
7,458
Reputation
2,770
Daps
36,836
Reppin
T-Dot
I think most people respect the concept of vaccines.....they get the science.

What people might have an issue with is and what gets mixed up in the media is what other chemicals are going into the vaccines ....... that ... just a hunch... maybe shouldn't be there... :ld: ......

That's where contention comes into play....


What chemicals are you talking about?
JbpRzPN.png
 

newworldafro

DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
51,421
Reputation
5,343
Daps
115,998
Reppin
In the Silver Lining
What chemicals are you talking about?
JbpRzPN.png

I'll let the CDC tell you about it....

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/additives.htm

Ingredients of Vaccines - Fact Sheet

Chemicals commonly used in the production of vaccines include a suspending fluid (sterile water, saline, or fluids containing protein); preservatives and stabilizers (for example, albumin, phenols, and glycine); and adjuvants or enhancers that help improve the vaccine's effectiveness. Vaccines also may contain very small amounts of the culture material used to grow the virus or bacteria used in the vaccine, such as chicken egg protein.

Vaccine ingredients sorted by vaccine [3 pages]
U.S. Vaccine excipients (inactive substance used as a carrier for the active ingredients of a medication) and media summary, part 2 from the "Pink Book"
Top of Page

Aluminum in Vaccines: What you should know [2 pages] " Also available inSpanish [2 pages]
  • Antibiotics which are added to some vaccines to prevent the growth of germs (bacteria) during production and storage of the vaccine. No vaccine produced in the United States contains penicillin.
  • Egg protein is found in influenza and yellow fever vaccines, which are prepared using chicken eggs. Ordinarily, persons who are able to eat eggs or egg products safely can receive these vaccines.
  • Formaldehyde is used to inactivate bacterial products for toxoid vaccines, (these are vaccines that use an inactive bacterial toxin to produce immunity.) It is also used to kill unwanted viruses and bacteria that might contaminate the vaccine during production. Most formaldehyde is removed from the vaccine before it is packaged.
  • Monosodium glutamate (MSG) and 2-phenoxy-ethanol which are used as stabilizers in a few vaccines to help the vaccine remain unchanged when the vaccine is exposed to heat, light, acidity, or humidity.
  • Thimerosal is a mercury-containing preservative that is added to vials of vaccine that contain more than one dose to prevent contamination and growth of potentially harmful bacteria.
For children with a prior history of allergic reactions to any of these substances in vaccines, parents should consult their child’s healthcare provider before vaccination.





Some of these ingredients......:patrice: :lupe:
 

Brosef

I respect O.G. knowledge
Supporter
Joined
Jun 10, 2012
Messages
7,458
Reputation
2,770
Daps
36,836
Reppin
T-Dot
I'll let the CDC tell you about it....

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/additives.htm

Ingredients of Vaccines - Fact Sheet

Chemicals commonly used in the production of vaccines include a suspending fluid (sterile water, saline, or fluids containing protein); preservatives and stabilizers (for example, albumin, phenols, and glycine); and adjuvants or enhancers that help improve the vaccine's effectiveness. Vaccines also may contain very small amounts of the culture material used to grow the virus or bacteria used in the vaccine, such as chicken egg protein.

Vaccine ingredients sorted by vaccine [3 pages]
U.S. Vaccine excipients (inactive substance used as a carrier for the active ingredients of a medication) and media summary, part 2 from the "Pink Book"
Top of Page

Aluminum in Vaccines: What you should know [2 pages] " Also available inSpanish [2 pages]
  • Antibiotics which are added to some vaccines to prevent the growth of germs (bacteria) during production and storage of the vaccine. No vaccine produced in the United States contains penicillin.
  • Egg protein is found in influenza and yellow fever vaccines, which are prepared using chicken eggs. Ordinarily, persons who are able to eat eggs or egg products safely can receive these vaccines.
  • Formaldehyde is used to inactivate bacterial products for toxoid vaccines, (these are vaccines that use an inactive bacterial toxin to produce immunity.) It is also used to kill unwanted viruses and bacteria that might contaminate the vaccine during production. Most formaldehyde is removed from the vaccine before it is packaged.
  • Monosodium glutamate (MSG) and 2-phenoxy-ethanol which are used as stabilizers in a few vaccines to help the vaccine remain unchanged when the vaccine is exposed to heat, light, acidity, or humidity.
  • Thimerosal is a mercury-containing preservative that is added to vials of vaccine that contain more than one dose to prevent contamination and growth of potentially harmful bacteria.
For children with a prior history of allergic reactions to any of these substances in vaccines, parents should consult their child’s healthcare provider before vaccination.





Some of these ingredients......:patrice: :lupe:

Breh the concentrations of some of those are less than in the air you breathe...

e.g. Thiomersal looks scary in your 2 line description but not so much when you actually break it down...

http://www.fda.gov/biologicsbloodvaccines/safetyavailability/vaccinesafety/ucm096228#t1

If you're gonna try to be a scholar, don't half ass your research
 

newworldafro

DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
51,421
Reputation
5,343
Daps
115,998
Reppin
In the Silver Lining
Breh the concentrations of some of those are less than in the air you breathe...

e.g. Thiomersal looks scary in your 2 line description but not so much when you actually break it down...

http://www.fda.gov/biologicsbloodvaccines/safetyavailability/vaccinesafety/ucm096228#t1

If you're gonna try to be a scholar, don't half ass your research

:ld:


http://blogs.findlaw.com/decided/20...-for-vaccine-defects-rules-supreme-court.html

Can't Sue Drug Companies for Vaccine Defects Rules Supreme Court
By Stephanie Rabiner, Esq. on February 24, 2011 5:51 AM
On a 6-2 vote, the Supreme Court has issued an opinion ruling that vaccine makerscannot be sued in state courts for vaccine defects that arise out of the product's design. The case, Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, stems from a series of DPT shots given to Hannah Bruesewitz when she was an infant in 1992.

After receiving the third shot in the series, Hannah began to have seizures, reports CNN. The family blamed Wyeth for the child's disorder, alleging that the manufacturer had a better, less dangerous vaccine that it failed to promote. The "vaccine court" rejected the claim that the vaccine was tied to Hannah's injuries. The Bruesewitzes then sued Wyeth in state court alleging design defects.


What many people don't know is that the "vaccine court" comes from the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. The Act was a response to vaccine shortages caused by frequent tort lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers. It provides immunity to vaccine manufacturers in exchange for a small excise tax on each dose. Persons injured by vaccines file claims in the Court of Federal Claims, and injuries found linked to vaccines are compensated from a fund.

The issue presented in Bruesewitz v. Wyeth was whether the Act preempted state law claims against manufacturers for vaccine defects related to design. In other words, in addition to or instead of the vaccine court, can vaccine manufacturers be sued in state court for design defects?

In deciding that there is no design defect liability outside of the vaccine court, the Supreme Court employed the doctrine of preemption. Preemption basically means that federal law supersedes state law when the two conflict. The Act does not specifically address the issue of vaccine defects in design, or speak to state law claims. Therefore, the Court had to employ a bit of interpretation.

The Act specifically states that vaccine manufacturers are not liable for injuries and death that "result from side effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper directions and warnings."

The Court pointed to the "even though" clause, basically saying that it lists the measures a manufacturer must take for injury to be considered unavoidable, thus limiting liability. So, as long as a vaccine maker manufactured the drug properly and included proper directions and warnings, it is not liable for anything--included vaccine defects related to design.

What does this mean for people who are injured by vaccines? It's very likely that, unless a victim can prove that a vaccine maker didn't manufacture the product correctly, or didn't include proper directions or warnings, he's stuck in the vaccine court and any limitations it has imposed on recovery.



Waits for well crafted response :lupe:
 
Last edited:

Brosef

I respect O.G. knowledge
Supporter
Joined
Jun 10, 2012
Messages
7,458
Reputation
2,770
Daps
36,836
Reppin
T-Dot
:ld:

Can't Sue Drug Companies for Vaccine Defects Rules Supreme Court
By Stephanie Rabiner, Esq. on February 24, 2011 5:51 AM
On a 6-2 vote, the Supreme Court has issued an opinion ruling that vaccine makerscannot be sued in state courts for vaccine defects that arise out of the product's design. The case, Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, stems from a series of DPT shots given to Hannah Bruesewitz when she was an infant in 1992.

After receiving the third shot in the series, Hannah began to have seizures, reports CNN. The family blamed Wyeth for the child's disorder, alleging that the manufacturer had a better, less dangerous vaccine that it failed to promote. The "vaccine court" rejected the claim that the vaccine was tied to Hannah's injuries. The Bruesewitzes then sued Wyeth in state court alleging design defects.


What many people don't know is that the "vaccine court" comes from the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. The Act was a response to vaccine shortages caused by frequent tort lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers. It provides immunity to vaccine manufacturers in exchange for a small excise tax on each dose. Persons injured by vaccines file claims in the Court of Federal Claims, and injuries found linked to vaccines are compensated from a fund.

The issue presented in Bruesewitz v. Wyeth was whether the Act preempted state law claims against manufacturers for vaccine defects related to design. In other words, in addition to or instead of the vaccine court, can vaccine manufacturers be sued in state court for design defects?

In deciding that there is no design defect liability outside of the vaccine court, the Supreme Court employed the doctrine of preemption. Preemption basically means that federal law supersedes state law when the two conflict. The Act does not specifically address the issue of vaccine defects in design, or speak to state law claims. Therefore, the Court had to employ a bit of interpretation.

The Act specifically states that vaccine manufacturers are not liable for injuries and death that "result from side effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper directions and warnings."

The Court pointed to the "even though" clause, basically saying that it lists the measures a manufacturer must take for injury to be considered unavoidable, thus limiting liability. So, as long as a vaccine maker manufactured the drug properly and included proper directions and warnings, it is not liable for anything--included vaccine defects related to design.

What does this mean for people who are injured by vaccines? It's very likely that, unless a victim can prove that a vaccine maker didn't manufacture the product correctly, or didn't include proper directions or warnings, he's stuck in the vaccine court and any limitations it has imposed on recovery.



Waits for well crafted response :lupe:

The conclusion of the article is: "So, as long as a vaccine maker manufactured the drug properly and included proper directions and warnings, it is not liable for anything"

There's nothing wrong with that. Everything has risks and benefits. Any production vaccine's benefits greatly outweigh the risks. Thousands of scientific articles will tell you this
 

newworldafro

DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
51,421
Reputation
5,343
Daps
115,998
Reppin
In the Silver Lining
The conclusion of the article is: "So, as long as a vaccine maker manufactured the drug properly and included proper directions and warnings, it is not liable for anything"

There's nothing wrong with that. Everything has risks and benefits. Any production vaccine's benefits greatly outweigh the risks. Thousands of scientific articles will tell you this

What it says is you have no recourse ..........

Where they do they do that ?... what other industry gets those types of free passes?? :patrice:
 
Top