SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
From the (boneheaded) editor: My apologies. I pooched this one in a way that is exceptional, even for me. I humbly beg your forgiveness. The line for torches is on the left, and pitchforks is on the right. Please, move on to the next story and don't waste any further time on this one.
Regards,
cmn32480
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
I'm wearing PAMPERS!!
(Score: 5, Insightful) by pTamok on Tuesday March 15 2016, @12:00PM
that SoylentNews is promoting such a deeply misleading scare story about vaccinations. It should never have got through the editorial filter.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @12:02PM
Vaccines may not cause autism, but they do cause people who make comments on the Internet to accuse others they disagree with of having autism.
(Score: 3, Disagree) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday March 15 2016, @12:12PM
I'm pleasantly surprised that "the other side" of the story is getting told at all, anywhere. There is a full court media blitz surrounding vaccines, almost as extreme as "aliens are out there" - do I believe that the US government has a flying saucer in a secret military base? I'll go with 99.9% no, I don't think that's true - but I'll also go out on a limb here and say that somewhere in the local super-cluster, there are other life forms with at least as much space travel capability as we have, and probably quite a bit more.
The "Vaccinate NOW" rhetoric is so fever-pitched that it has that "something to hide, conspiracy" feel to it. I think it would be a lot more credible if it weren't so often pushed as "don't argue, just do it, the science is settled," while simultaneously painting the other side as Jenny McCarthy acolytes.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 2) by SecurityGuy on Tuesday March 15 2016, @01:27PM
These things swing back and forth. For a while, there was an "OMG! Vaccines are bad!" that yes, was driven by idiots like McCarthy who have no scientific credibility but did have a platform. Sure, it'd be nice if we ever had a populace that's scientifically literate enough to hold on to a kernel of skepticism while also accepting that the science is really, really solid that vaccines are a net good. Since we don't, if we have to have an overreaction, I'd rather have an overreaction that promotes doing the sensible thing over the stupid thing.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Osamabobama on Tuesday March 15 2016, @07:41PM
Public opinion has a lightly damped, second-order response to vaccine news.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @01:32PM
If you had one iota of evidence that vaccines were dangerous you would have a leg to stand on. This article contains no such evidence and the sources listed do not agree with the articles positions. Until the point that some reliable evidence is put forward that there is a serious danger from vaccines you really are nothing more then a Jenny McCarthy acolyte.
(Score: 2) by Lunix Nutcase on Tuesday March 15 2016, @02:00PM
The link is not an article. It's a newswire press release.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @02:03PM
I was trying to give the benefit of the doubt calling it an article.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday March 15 2016, @02:44PM
The vaccination injury compensation fund is not only evidence but acknowledgement of significant harm coming from vaccines. Are injuries rare? Yes. Are they significant to the people and families they happen to? Extremely. As a collective species, are we better off with vaccinations or without? The science is clear: as a collective species, vaccinations are beneficial.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 2) by Vanderhoth on Tuesday March 15 2016, @03:22PM
Exactly this.
Given the choice, I will have (and have) my kid vaccinated. Most of the time it's safe and the benefits to everyone else out weighs the potential issues. That said, I can see how some people wouldn't want to risk it. We can't say there aren't ANY risks involved because we know there are some people (egg allergies and compromised immune systems come to mind) who can't get vaccinated. The idea is people who can, should, for the benefit of those people who can't.
I'm of the opinion though that that's a personal choice, you can't force someone to risk someone else's life, especially their own children. And that's why these debates always go south so quickly.
One side has science and probabilities on their side and they're not being asked to take that risk, or may not even be aware there's a risk at all, they just do it and nothing happened to them, so why shouldn't everyone else. The way others see it though is they're being asked/ordered by others to take that risk. It's very unsettling to know there's even a small chance you could be seriously putting your kid in any danger at all, even if the chances are really good it'll be beneficial overall. Which was my reasoning for having my kid vaccinated. Without the vaccines there's still a chance she could get sick, so in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation I chose public and personal safety with small risk over just personal safety, also with small risk.
But people need to stop butting in on parents, butting into other people in general, responsibilities. If you think it's ok to force people that disagree with you to do things they don't want to do, just remember you could be on the other side of that situation some day and you're creating the framework that will let people get away with it.
"Now we know", "And knowing is half the battle". -G.I. Joooooe
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday March 15 2016, @04:47PM
You have an odd definition of "significant."
How many petitions have been awarded compensation?
According to the CDC, from 2006 to 2014 over 2.5 billion doses of covered vaccines were distributed in
the U.S. For petitions filed in this time period, 3,389 petitions were adjudicated by the Court, and of
those 2,146 were compensated. This means for every 1 million doses of vaccine that were distributed, 1
individual was compensated.
reference [hrsa.gov]
(Score: 1) by Osamabobama on Tuesday March 15 2016, @07:48PM
...but the compensation, when awarded, averaged (medianed?) around $600k. There is a $0.75 fee for each vaccine to pay for the fund, which pays out about $0.54 on average, so it's solvent, at least.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday March 15 2016, @08:56PM
$600K compensation on average... that's significant to the people who receive it, and not everyone who is eligible is interested in fighting the fight to receive compensation.
Also, 1/million vaccines, is more like 1/100,000 people.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @06:20PM
No, it isn't. It is an acknowledgement that we live in a litigious society where injury lawyers are regularly chasing after ambulances in hot pursuit of a big payola.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @01:51PM
Wow, what a moron.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Lunix Nutcase on Tuesday March 15 2016, @01:57PM
The proof of the dumbing-down of society is in the parent's post.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @02:09PM
I'm not sure there is much dumbing-down. Most people in society were always quite dumb.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @07:18PM
It's just that the intellectual 1%-ers grabbing an ever larger proportion of the world's knowledge.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bradley13 on Tuesday March 15 2016, @02:35PM
"I'm pleasantly surprised that "the other side" of the story is getting told at all, anywhere."
The thing is, there is no "other side", at least, not any more than there is another side to the theory of the earth being a globe. Sure, there are flat-earthers, but they deserve all of the ridicule they get. So do the anti-vaxxers.
Aside from anti-vaxxer sites making stuff up, there is no evidence of vaccinated people being contagious. And if someone does get ill, that's a sure indication that they, themselves, were not vaccinated. Unless they are a young infant, or immune compromised, then it's their own damned fault.
"The "Vaccinate NOW" rhetoric is so fever-pitched..." If true, it's out of irritation. Where I live, lots of medical personnel refuse to get vaccinated. Totally inexcusable - as far as I am concerned, that should be a firing offense. Because they then get sick, and during the first few days they may well come to work while contagious, risking the lives of their (already ill) patients.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday March 15 2016, @02:49PM
Here's some evidence of another side to the story:
http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/ [hrsa.gov]
I agree with the "very rare" statement in their website, but one in a million is very rare, and is still affecting hundreds of people in the U.S.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @04:20PM
1 in a million is no more then a statistical anomaly.
These people take higher risks driving the Prius to the grocery store.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bradley13 on Tuesday March 15 2016, @05:09PM
Yes, just like there is "another side" to seatbelts. Once in a great while, someone is trapped in a burning car, because they cannot release their seatbelt. Or wearing a helmet during dangerous sports - once in a weird while, I'm sure you can blame the helmet itself for an injury.
This is not a sensible argument against seatbelts, or helmets, or vaccinations.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by HiThere on Tuesday March 15 2016, @07:34PM
It's not a sensible argument against vaccinations, but it is, if honestly presented, a valid "other side". Few things are either all positive or all negative.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 16 2016, @01:04AM
Finally a sane, non-extreme comment.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday March 16 2016, @12:44PM
Let me lead with "and I still think vaccines are a generally good thing", but take a shot at your seatbelts and helmet analogies: seatbelts and helmets first do no harm, and then increase your odds of a good outcome in the event of a (rare) accident. Administering a vaccine is more like running a crash-test on your child, and usually coming out with a good result that makes them safer in the future.
I do have a problem with physicians who ignore the Hippocratic oath, and lots of them do when "science" predicts better outcomes down the road.
"Science" is generally good, but when differential reimbursement is thrown into the decision tree - I do personally know more than one licensed physician who errs on the side of getting paid.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @02:51PM
http://graphics.wsj.com/infectious-diseases-and-vaccines/ [wsj.com]
This shows better than anything why to get vaccinated. We went from nearly eradicating some diseases to them becoming a thing again.
This seems to be a generational thing. "the greatest generation" knows. Ask them about how many brothers, sisters, and friends they lost to particular diseases. Ask them about quarantine houses. Diseases where it is not common knowledge what the symptoms are anymore (we have to look it up). When I was younger my grandmother would take us to the gravesites of her dead brothers and sisters. It was a special part of a cemetery. It was quite full of very old grave markers of children that died before they were 5.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @05:47PM
Interesting link. While I agree that vaccinations are probably a huge contributing factor to the decline in many of these diseases this does not necessarily mean it is the only reason alone why these diseases have been in decline. It could also be that an increased awareness of these diseases and how they spread has also improved our ability to detect and stop their spread through earlier detection and prevention. Things like disinfectants, advancements in the manufacturing of and improvements in the use of disinfectants to prevent the spread of a disease when it's present based on what we learn about it, improvements in our ability to prevent air born diseases in hospitals by improving ventilation systems and creating better quarantine systems, improvements in sanitation systems, etc... have all probably contributed as well.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Tuesday March 15 2016, @06:31PM
And if someone does get ill, that's a sure indication that they, themselves, were not vaccinated. Unless they are a young infant, or immune compromised, then it's their own damned fault.
I disagree. Anyone under the age of 18 is not a legal adult and their parents make medical decisions for them, so they can't be blamed either, when their parents refuse to get them vaccinated.
Where I live, lots of medical personnel refuse to get vaccinated.
What horrible place is this?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tibman on Tuesday March 15 2016, @02:42PM
I think it's because there is almost zero reason not to be vaccinated. Reasons not to get vaccinated are mostly made up bullshit. If you have a compromised immune system then you can still get vaccinated. You'll just want the dead version instead of the live (and more effective) version. If you are allergic to one of the key ingredients then you may not be able to be vaccinated, but that is nothing against vaccines and is against the delivery method. If there was a credible reason not to be vaccinated then the majority wouldn't be so "don't argue, just do it".
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday March 15 2016, @04:04PM
If there was a credible reason not to be vaccinated then the majority wouldn't be so "don't argue, just do it".
I was a new parent during the "mercury wars" (in the 2001-2005 timeframe) at the beginning there was a strong "don't argue, just do it" sentiment about mercury in vaccines, fillings, light bulbs, etc. The majority opinion in early 2001 was that only kooks are worried about mercury, and it was even stronger in the mid 1990s. Fast forward 10 years and all the same actors who were saying "don't worry about mercury" have reversed position and you'd now be a kook if you accepted mercury in almost anything that has an alternative.
We've gone through similar "revelations" about industrial lead, arsenic, asbestos, and DDT if your memory goes back that far - it starts with a general "technology X is beneficial, benefits far outweigh the risks or negative consequences, only very rare edge cases ever show any negative impact..." and slowly swings around to ads on billboards for lawyers who will get your family compensation for injury related to exposure...
I'm not saying that all vaccines are about to be revealed as some sort of health catastrophe. Their benefits clearly far outweigh the negative consequences to society as a whole, but the parallels in public opinion for vaccines and other "miracle technologies" that have later been abandoned are striking.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 2) by tibman on Tuesday March 15 2016, @05:29PM
That's a very fair assessment. But i think you can't excluded where the message is coming from. Monsanto telling you something is good to eat is different than the FDA and that is different than the (actually independent) scientific studies. Neonicotinoids, i'm looking at you!
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @07:29PM
Holy Jebbush, you appear to not have realised that the FDA is in the pockets of big agro and big pharma. I wouldn't trust the FDA further than I could check the source of the funding behind the studies they promote.
(Score: 2) by tibman on Tuesday March 15 2016, @10:16PM
Scientific studies are also in the pockets of big agro. So please notice my ordering from least reliable to greatest.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @03:22PM
o I believe that the US government has a flying saucer in a secret military base? I'll go with 99.9% no, I don't think that's true
You're just ignorant, some top secret flying saucers were built in Canada, as the declassified reports show. [popularmechanics.com] "Aliens" are just cover story for top secret flying machines. UFOs are unidentified flying objects, and of course they exist.
Furthermore, the USAF has a form of holographic projection [archive.org] which is what most of those glowing lights which change direction too fast to be an air craft are. Note its uses are listed as cloaking, and for PSYOPS -- like convincing people aliens are real. China has been demonstrating theirs as well [youtube.com] (and no, these are not "phantom morgana", as those only occur near the horizon). They're military grade versions of water(vapor) projection systems. [youtube.com] To cause the darkened buildings you lighten surrounding screen / vapor / cloud then block the light to create the buildings.
Now, if you're that fucking ignorant about flying saucers and holographic PSYOPS, why the fuck would I listen to your opinion on anything, let alone vaccines? Someone like you should start down the rabbit hole by reading UN Agenda 21 and UN Agenda 2030. Maybe get a different perspective on why the Hammond Ranch and similar incidents occur. [vimeo.com] Then do some research on the aforementioned depopulation agendas. Only then will you begin to have valuable opinions on population-wide programs. Get back to me after you've studied the unnatural pattern of outbreak of Ebola, and realize that HIV shares the same cellular infection vector though the viruses are vastly different in size and evolutionary path. We now have a cure for Ebola. In fact, Texas A&M wanted to make a batch to help with the outbreaks in Africa, but the patent holder said no. Well, if we have a cure for Ebola, and HIV has the same infection vector, then where is the cure for -- Ahhh, too far. Go read the depopulation agenda's first.
(Score: 2) by J053 on Wednesday March 16 2016, @01:10AM
(Score: 2) by Capt. Obvious on Tuesday March 15 2016, @03:29PM
It is. The one study that said the MMR vaccine has been disavowed by every scientist who was involved in its writting and review with the exception of the main investigator, the one who had patented a new MMR vaccine that the market wasn't adopting because it was worse.
(Score: 1, Troll) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday March 15 2016, @04:10PM
I'll go along with "Wakefield was corrupt" and his results were never replicated, etc. But what bothers me is that we didn't simply have a half dozen independent researchers go out, reproduce and extend the experiment and publish conflicting findings that outweighed Wakefield - that would be science, that would be worthy of basing decisions on. What bothers me is that the whole thing became a huge media spectacle, with personal attacks, destruction of careers, giant smear campaigns with "talking heads" shouting each other down on television. Why so much emotion before the science was in? Can you trust the science when it is such a politically hot topic?
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @05:42PM
There have been tens if not hundreds of studies that refute wakefield, not to mention the ease at which his study is picked about primarily for its minuscule sample size.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @06:30PM
And you can add on top of that the millions of lives that have been saved by vaccination. It is astounding to me how the anti-vaxxers will stubbornly refuse to see the evidence all around them. Perhaps they are all too young to remember when MMR were real killers?
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday March 16 2016, @12:58PM
They did that. The thing was, Wakefield and the people paying him had already gone to the press with his brand new study, because the purpose of the brand new study was to be able to sue the heck out of MMR vaccine manufacturers on behalf of the autistic kids' parents, even though that wasn't actually true.
1. As previously mentioned, it was a huge media spectacle before the first contradicting study came out.
2. Wakefield deserved to have his career destroyed. Not because he got something wrong (lots of honest scientists have that happen), but because he was paid to produce a particular result and made stuff up to get that result. Which isn't science, it's propaganda masquerading as science.
3. I agree it should not have been TV talking heads shouting at each other. Instead, it should have been a simple report with a reporter saying "All the science has made it abundantly clear that our previous reports about a link between vaccines and autism was completely wrong. This happens with science: Sometimes they get a result, run more tests, and find out that they were wrong." They don't do that because news organizations like having talking heads shouting at each other even if one of those talking heads is completely demonstrably wrong e.g. evolution vs creationism.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday March 16 2016, @02:17PM
I agree that (given the evidence I have access to, it appears that) Wakefield should have gone down in flames. The media really shouldn't have allowed Wakefield all the access they did based on his first study, but they can be gullible that way.
Tangent: I lived near the kook who was going to burn a Quran on the anniversary of 9-11, he actually managed to get Obama to react to him in the press, the first time. A year later he pulled a similar stunt, but I only heard about it because I was local - thankfully the media learned on that one.
Україна досі не є частиною Росії Слава Україні🌻 https://news.stanford.edu/2023/02/17/will-russia-ukraine-war-end
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 15 2016, @06:17PM
The other side is a bunch of Jenny McCarthy acolytes. Seriously, do you know of any credible evidence that vaccines cause autism/whatever? The only one research paper I know of has now been thoroughly discredited and it is now disavowed by all the authors except the one author looking to promote his own brand of vaccine! In contrast, vaccination is known to save lives. Literally millions of lives have been saved by vaccination. So tell us, why should we believe Ms Jenny McCarthy's version of "science" over the proven results of vaccination?
(Score: 2, Informative) by korla_plankton on Tuesday March 15 2016, @03:25PM
Sites like Soylent and, once upon a time, Slashdot are read as much or more for the comments than the summaries. I applaud the editors for letting this perspective through the 'filter' and I applaud some of the commenters for discussing the issues with that perspective. Carry on, Soylentils!