Anti-vaxxers

One eyed Jack · 10-02-2019 12:47am

TheRepentent wrote: »

Nice wall of text explaining your ignorance.

I feel sorry for your kids.

You’re so full of your own self-importance that you imagine anyone gives a ****e for your pity?

Come down out of there ffs.

Muckka · 10-02-2019 12:50am

I get a flu jab the last 3 year's, no flu or complications...

In the last 4 weeks 3 of my colleagues have been out sick for a week on different week's.

Haven't had the flu in 3 year's either.

The odd sniffle here and there

TheRepentent · 10-02-2019 12:58am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You’re so full of your own self-importance that you imagine anyone gives a ****e for your pity?

Come down out of there ffs.

You're leaving your children open to being infected by a preventable illness with life changing effects and even if they surrive they can spread it to other children who might not be as lucky.

I feel sorry for your children.And all the other children that have to interact with yours.

Zero tolerance..no creche or school access to children that are unvaccinated.

One eyed Jack · 10-02-2019 1:36am

Paddy Cow wrote: »

If someone wanted to bleed to death, rather than accept a blood transfusion, that's fine. They are an adult and have body autonomy. If they want their child to bleed to death, rather than give them a transfusion, the state steps in and says the child gets the transfusion.

This is true, however it’s a completely separate issue to the issue of vaccination. The State does not oblige parents to have their children vaccinated, and the State cannot simply step in and vaccinate children against a parents wishes.

TheRepentent · 10-02-2019 1:45am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

the State cannot simply step in and vaccinate children against a parents wishes.

And they won't. They can remove services.

no vacinations no school.simples

One eyed Jack · 10-02-2019 1:51am

GreeBo wrote: »

The problem here is that you don't worry about your children infecting everyone else. ****ty attitude indeed.

While that may be a problem for other people, it’s not a problem for me, as I don’t worry about my child being infected in the first place with HPV, let alone do I worry about the idea that they would spread the disease to any of their future sexual partners.

By the standards of what constitutes a shìtty attitude, that’s merely a disagreement of opinion, which would render the standard baseless. A ****ty attitude as far as I’m concerned is someone who refers to people who disagree with their opinions as ‘retarded’. Unfortunately, in spite of greater access to education, a treatment for Ignorance remains elusive as in spite the best efforts of many, some people still appear to be highly resistant.

pjohnson wrote: »

Think they are right to be more concerned about what diseases your own shítty spawn has that could infect their child. Your negligence/under education affects them.

My own “****ty spawn”?

Wow, charmer :pac:

Thankfully for my child at least, the education I received appears to have differed from your own and I would never refer to anyone’s children as their “****ty spawn”, nor would I ever encourage my child to do so.

One eyed Jack · 10-02-2019 1:54am

TheRepentent wrote: »

And they won't. They can remove services.

no vacinations no school.simples

What part of “parents who are not dependent upon public services” are you having difficulty with?

TheRepentent · 10-02-2019 2:26am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

What part of “parents who are not dependent upon public services” are you having difficulty with?

So your child doesn't use creche or school?

One eyed Jack · 10-02-2019 2:45am

TheRepentent wrote: »

So your child doesn't use creche or school?

They were never enrolled in a crèche, and while they are enrolled in a public school, this simply means I don’t have to pay for their education privately.

The thing is though, that even if Government were to implement your strategy (which they won’t), it wouldn’t have any impact on parents who can afford to educate their children privately, and still refuse to vaccinate their children. It would only affect parents who cannot afford to educate their children privately, and it’s been demonstrated time and time again that it is the children of parents who are living in socioeconomic deprivation who are the most in need of education. It wouldn’t be any skin off a parents nose who doesn’t value education, but that particular ethnic minority aren’t generally averse to vaccination anyway, so in effect all you would really be doing is encouraging Government to waste taxpayers money on an ineffective policy.

If you imagine people haven’t done the math on this long before you ever thought of it, you’d be wrong. Most politicians don’t want to touch the vaccination issue with yours.

TheRepentent · 10-02-2019 3:21am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

they are enrolled in a public school,

One eyed Jack · 10-02-2019 3:33am

TheRepentent wrote: »

What’s the confusion about? You put it to me that my child was never enrolled in a crèche or school, and I said that they were never enrolled in a crèche, but they are enrolled in a public school. I’m assuming you’re suggesting that your policy would only be able to be implemented in schools which receive funding from the State, which would be no barrier to anyone who could afford to educate their children privately. Your short-sighted policy would simply be a waste of public funds -

So, why is there a trend towards mandates and other legal instruments? Political science research on the value of international sanctions against rogue nations has found that while they are often ineffective, sanctions may give some satisfaction to the government implementing the rules. The same may apply to vaccine mandates. ‘Sanctions are often more about the sender than the recipient,’ says Dr Katie Attwell, University of Western Australia, ‘Maybe it’s more of an emotional experience for those who want to punish a country – or, in in the case of vaccinations, a citizen – that deviates from the norm.’

The impact of mandates in European countries has been assessed by the EU-funded ASSET project which found no clear link between vaccine uptake and mandatory vaccination. The report, which has been cited by the European Commission in response to questions from Members of the European Parliament states: ‘The enforcement of mandatory vaccinations does not appear to be relevant in determining childhood immunisation rate in the analysed countries. Those [countries] where a vaccination is mandatory do not usually reach better coverage than neighbour or similar countries where there is no legal obligation.’

ASSET experts have also argued that while mandatory vaccination might fix a short-term problem, it is not a long-term solution. Better organisation of health systems and strong communication strategies may prove more effective. ‘Mandatory vaccinations for both healthcare workers and the public can obtain a rapid improvement in immunisation rates, but in the end, have high costs, especially in term of litigation,’ says Dr Darina O’Flanagan, previous Director of Health Protection Surveillance Centre Ireland and a member of the Advisory Forum of the European Centre for Disease Control 2005-2016.

This is echoed by the EU Commissioner with responsibility for health, Dr Vytenis Andriukaitis ‘The legitimate goal of achieving the highest possible immunisation rates can be attained through less stringent policies, and most Member States prefer the adoption of ‘recommendation policies’ or else a mix of obligation/recommendation policies,’ according to EU Commissioner.

Source: Mandatory Vaccination: Does it work in Europe?

TheRepentent · 10-02-2019 3:58am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Source: Mandatory Vaccination: Does it work in Europe?

lol

One eyed Jack · 10-02-2019 4:05am

TheRepentent wrote: »

lol

What’s ‘lol’ about, what were you expecting exactly? They’re experts on the efficacy of mandatory vaccination programmes and because they don’t share your opinion, the best you can do is ‘lol’?

I wish I could say it’s been interesting, but I’d be lying. I’ll unsubscribe from the thread now and let you get back to the usual impotent rabble rousing.

GreeBo · 10-02-2019 7:34am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

What part of “parents who are not dependent upon public services” are you having difficulty with?

You better hope they don't need hospitalization or a transplant during their lives.
I'm sure your Alaskan wilderness approach to society will be comforting for them as your shamen starts the blood letting ceremony.

One eyed Jack · 10-02-2019 8:28am

GreeBo wrote: »

You better hope they don't need hospitalization or a transplant during their lives.
I'm sure your Alaskan wilderness approach to society will be comforting for them as your shamen starts the blood letting ceremony.

I think that’s fairly standard hope that any parent would have for their children. It doesn’t mean I’m going to base my child’s life around the idea that something is an inevitability when I know it’s more unlikely than it is likely they would ever need an organ transplant for example. Even if I didn’t already have private health insurance, the cost would be borne by the State, and as a taxpayer I really don’t have any issue with the fact that approximately one third of the population have medical cards?

Ireland has a 2-tiered healthcare system. All residents are entitled to receive healthcare through the public healthcare system, which is funded by general taxation and organized by the Health Service Executive. Transplantation is performed under the umbrella of the public health system. Approximately one third of Irish residents additionally hold a medical card—which entitles them to free hospital care, general practitioner visits and prescription drugs for a minimal fee—based on low income or long-term or severe illnesses. Essentially all transplant recipients qualify for medical card coverage.

Source: Transplantation in Ireland

I might have had cause for concern regarding organ transplant outcomes 30 years ago, but having seen what is achievable today, I don’t have the same concerns. In the same way, I think that vaccination programmes will have to change to accommodate the fact that we aren’t living the same lifestyles according to the same standards when vaccinations were the breakthrough in tackling infectious diseases, which today are no longer the threat they once were, thanks of course to the success of vaccination programmes.

Now we have to look at new ways of preventing diseases which aren’t dependent upon altruism or conformity in an increasingly selfish and individualistic society, as herd immunity came about at a time when individual rights and freedoms weren’t really a thing. Appealing to people’s better nature doesn’t really work either, nor does condemnation, and the figures with regard to certain vaccines at least speak for themselves - the percentage of people availing of vaccines just isn’t high enough to provide effective herd immunity any more.

Buford T. Justice XIX · 10-02-2019 3:32pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’ll make you a deal?

I’ll worry about my children, and you worry about your shìtty attitude rubbing off on your own children.

pjohnson wrote: »

Think they are right to be more concerned about what diseases your own shítty spawn has that could infect their child. Your negligence/under education affects them.

Mod note: One eyed Jack, pjohnson, don't post in this thread again.

Buford T. Justice

GreeBo · 10-02-2019 6:14pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I think that’s fairly standard hope that any parent would have for their children. It doesn’t mean I’m going to base my child’s life around the idea that something is an inevitability when I know it’s more unlikely than it is likely they would ever need an organ transplant for example.

chances of needing an organ vs chances of negative reaction to a vaccine?

I might have had cause for concern regarding organ transplant outcomes 30 years ago, but having seen what is achievable today, I don’t have the same concerns. In the same way, I think that vaccination programmes will have to change to accommodate the fact that we aren’t living the same lifestyles according to the same standards when vaccinations were the breakthrough in tackling infectious diseases, which today are no longer the threat they once were, thanks of course to the success of vaccination programmes.

Ah so you won't vaccinate because we don't have to worry about diseases thanks to vaccination?
Gotcha.

francois · 11-02-2019 12:53pm

https://khn.org/news/measles-outbreak-sends-vaccine-demand-soaring-even-among-the-hesitant/

Igotadose · 12-02-2019 10:25am

An 18 year old in the US gets himself vaccinated against his anti-vax crank parents wishes. Mom makes it all about her - 'it's like a slap in the face!'

Well, better, Mom, that you got slapped in the face than your son got the mumps at age 18.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/ethan-lindenberger-vaccination-parents-controversy-measles-antivaccination-andrew-wakefield-a8774656.html

Unfortunately there's some wasted column space talking to fraudster Wakefield who played the poor me card yet again. No responsibility at all for what he's done.

VicMackey1 · 12-02-2019 11:26am

Igotadose wrote: »

An 18 year old in the US gets himself vaccinated against his anti-vax crank parents wishes. Mom makes it all about her - 'it's like a slap in the face!'

Well, better, Mom, that you got slapped in the face than your son got the mumps at age 18.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/ethan-lindenberger-vaccination-parents-controversy-measles-antivaccination-andrew-wakefield-a8774656.html

Unfortunately there's some wasted column space talking to fraudster Wakefield who played the poor me card yet again. No responsibility at all for what he's done.

Have to admire him for making the correct decision despite having to listen to his anti-vax parents for 18 years!

ancapailldorcha · 12-02-2019 11:30am

VicMackey1 wrote: »

Have to admire him for making the correct decision despite having to listen to his anti-vax parents for 18 years!

So we now live in a world where rebellious teenagers are sneaking out to get vaccinated.

Interesting times indeed...

Orion · 12-02-2019 12:25pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don’t worry about my child being infected in the first place with HPV, let alone do I worry about the idea that they would spread the disease to any of their future sexual partners.

[edit] missed the mod threadban for this poster. Removing my post as he's no right to reply.

RobertKK · 12-02-2019 12:54pm

It is bad enough a parent putting their child in danger by not vaccinating against disease that can kill or have really bad effects, but it is bordering on a crime if you don't vaccinate a child and they spread a preventable disease and it kills someone.
Not getting vaccinated is just so wrong.

Igotadose · 17-02-2019 10:45am

WA State moving along to ban vaccine exemptions for 'personal reasons.' All good.

https://gizmodo.com/washington-lawmakers-advance-bill-to-ban-vaccine-exempt-1832676994

old_aussie · 18-02-2019 11:11am

More than 900 dead in Madagascar measles epidemic

https://www.smh.com.au/world/africa/more-than-900-dead-in-madagascar-measles-epidemic-20190216-p50y96.html

Since the beginning of the outbreak in September, more than 66,000 people in the African island nation have been infected with the highly contagious virus, the WHO said.

Hope Australia limits entry or re-entry to those who have proof of vaccination.

I got a question for you anti vaxxers, Do you still believe the earth is flat?

ohnonotgmail · 18-02-2019 11:18am

old_aussie wrote: »

More than 900 dead in Madagascar measles epidemic

https://www.smh.com.au/world/africa/more-than-900-dead-in-madagascar-measles-epidemic-20190216-p50y96.html

Since the beginning of the outbreak in September, more than 66,000 people in the African island nation have been infected with the highly contagious virus, the WHO said.

Hope Australia limits entry or re-entry to those who have proof of vaccination.

Is that really anti-vax in the sense we are meaning it here or just not vaccinating their kids because they are dirt poor?

old_aussie · 18-02-2019 11:22am

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Is that really anti-vax in the sense we are meaning it here or just not vaccinating their kids because they are dirt poor?

Probably because they are uneducated and dirt poor,

Just pointing out how quickly an epidemic can spread and take lives.

"Measles is easily preventable through vaccination. The WHO has launched a campaign in collaboration with local authorities to vaccinate more than 6 million children in Madagascar.
The campaign also includes efforts to educate the population and counter negative perceptions about vaccinations."

ohnonotgmail · 18-02-2019 11:24am

old_aussie wrote: »

Probably because they are uneducated and dirt poor,

Just pointing out how quickly an epidemic can spread and take lives.

"Measles is easily preventable through vaccination. The WHO has launched a campaign in collaboration with local authorities to vaccinate more than 6 million children in Madagascar.
The campaign also includes efforts to educate the population and counter negative perceptions about vaccinations."

Fair enough, i just think we should make that distinction. I have sympathy for the people caught up in the situation in madagascar. I have none for those who could vaccinate their kids but refuse to.

old_aussie · 18-02-2019 9:13pm

Philippines says 136 people have died in measles outbreak

https://www.news.com.au/world/asia/philippines-says-136-people-have-died-in-measles-outbreak/news-story/19966c9474a422049d121d7ec7afdb1b

Fear over vaccinations has contributed to a spike in Philippines measles cases, with more than 130 people dead — mostly children — and more than 8,000 sick.

Notice that it's mainly innocent children dying!

kylith · 18-02-2019 10:00pm

And, unfortunately, it's not just the ones dying; there are hundreds of others left permanently disabled by this disease.

Paddy Cow · 19-02-2019 12:39am

This is insane. Measles is on the rise in Europe. There was an outbreak in America. There's outbreaks in Africa and Asia which has lead to hundreds of people dying. As the poster above said, it's not just deaths but people living with the scars of the disease. Where are the outbreaks of Autism? They don't exist! It's absolute madness.

Dohnjoe · 19-02-2019 2:41pm

I'm not one for censorship but they seriously need to think about tackling anti-vaxx disinformation on a global level

old_aussie · 19-02-2019 10:09pm

WHY THE CONFUSION

Only 12 children used for a research study and then make a medical conclusion...WTF!

According to an Australian Government fact sheet, in 1998, a research group in the UK led by Andrew Wakefield suggested some children who had received the MMR vaccine went on to develop bowel disease and developmental disorders such as autism.

The results of the research, which had included only 12 children, were published in a respected medical journal.

However, the authors retracted their claim there was any association between vaccination and autism in 2004.

old_aussie · 19-02-2019 10:21pm

The Latest Reported Measles Outbreak in British Columbia Canada Could Basically Be Blamed on Andrew Wakefield

This current outbreak in BC may have started due to three unvaccinated children who contracted measles during a trip to Vietnam.

After a number of hospital visits and a few days back at school, the youngest was finally tested for measles, and the disease was confirmed.

The dad of these kids has stepped forward to tell his side of the story. Sadly, it shows that even 20 years later, the dangerous and completely false 'vaccines cause autism' myth is still damaging families.

"We worried 10-12 years ago because there was a lot of debate around the MMR vaccine," the father explained in an interview with CBC News. "Doctors were coming out with research connecting the MMR vaccine with autism. So we were a little concerned."

TheChizler · 20-02-2019 12:29am

Personally I blame the media far more than Wakefield. Plenty of dishonest cranks out there. Not all get their unremarkable and flawed research propelled to the forefront of public discourse, followed up by countless opinions by non-experts. Not defending him at all but the media have scapegoated him when it's themselves they should have been critical of.

Dohnjoe · 20-02-2019 1:39am

TheChizler wrote: »

Personally I blame the media far more than Wakefield. Plenty of dishonest cranks out there. Not all get their unremarkable and flawed research propelled to the forefront of public discourse, followed up by countless opinions by non-experts. Not defending him at all but the media have scapegoated him when it's themselves they should have been critical of.

To be honest have never seen anti-vaxx stuff projected as truth on reputable outlets

It's really just through unfettered social media like Facebook, Youtube, "health blogs", etc

circadian · 20-02-2019 9:23am

I'm almost certain the propagation and growth of the anti-vax and flat earth movements we've seen in the last few years is driven in part by the Russian disinformation campaign. They've been at this craic for decades, there was a massive campaign that was successful claiming that Aids was a CIA biological weapon.

Looking at what's going on today you have Q-Anon (or is it R-Anon now?) With a sizeable following peddling all sorts of crazy conspiracies that people believe because it confirms their bias.

ohnonotgmail · 20-02-2019 9:41am

TheChizler wrote: »

Personally I blame the media far more than Wakefield. Plenty of dishonest cranks out there. Not all get their unremarkable and flawed research propelled to the forefront of public discourse, followed up by countless opinions by non-experts. Not defending him at all but the media have scapegoated him when it's themselves they should have been critical of.

Wakefield falsified the scientific study that a lot of anti-vaxxers still refer to. And he did it for financial gain. Any abuse he gets is well earned.

Igotadose · 20-02-2019 10:24am

TheChizler wrote: »

Personally I blame the media far more than Wakefield. Plenty of dishonest cranks out there. Not all get their unremarkable and flawed research propelled to the forefront of public discourse, followed up by countless opinions by non-experts. Not defending him at all but the media have scapegoated him when it's themselves they should have been critical of.

There weren't any before Wakefield that, at least, were doctors (there've always been snake oil salesmen with miracle cures.) But, Wakefiled committed this criminal activity because of his profit motivation and, *to this day*, continues to peddle his lies. The media in fact did debunk him, it was a journalist who chased it down.

Don't blame the media because there wasn't someone doing this before Wakefield. He's entirely to blame and, in fact, at this point is probably glad of what little media coverage he still gets.

If you want to blame anyone, blame the Lancet for publishing his twaddle. Massive failure on their part.

seamus · 20-02-2019 10:34am

Wakefield is directly responsible for hundreds of thousands of needless deaths at this point. Realistically he should be imprisoned for crimes against humanity.

TheChizler · 20-02-2019 1:23pm

Igotadose wrote: »

There weren't any before Wakefield that, at least, were doctors (there've always been snake oil salesmen with miracle cures.) But, Wakefiled committed this criminal activity because of his profit motivation and, *to this day*, continues to peddle his lies. The media in fact did debunk him, it was a journalist who chased it down.

Don't blame the media because there wasn't someone doing this before Wakefield. He's entirely to blame and, in fact, at this point is probably glad of what little media coverage he still gets.

If you want to blame anyone, blame the Lancet for publishing his twaddle. Massive failure on their part.

Plenty around before Wakefield, quite a bit of fear around thiomersal in the 90s in the US.

The point is, most people don't read the Lancet, most people get their news on science from newspapers, news reports, lifestyle tv, and tabloids. If you're lucky they quote an opinion from someone who knows what they're talking about, unfortunately not all the time. Not every journalist was complicit, but plenty were. While Wakefield deserves his share of the blame and to be struck off, he's not the only guilty party.

Much worse is published that we never hear about. It's quite dangerous to believe that one man was responsible for the entire scare. It allows everyone to point the finger at one person and avoid examining what really happened, and this leave the cycle open to being repeated.

https://www.badscience.net/2008/08/the-medias-mmr-hoax/

ohnonotgmail · 20-02-2019 1:29pm

TheChizler wrote: »

Plenty around before Wakefield, quite a bit of fear around thiomersal in the 90s in the US.

The point is, most people don't read the Lancet, most people get their news on science from newspapers, news reports, lifestyle tv, and tabloids. If you're lucky they quote an opinion from someone who knows what they're talking about, unfortunately not all the time. Not every journalist was complicit, but plenty were. While Wakefield deserves his share of the blame and to be struck off, he's not the only guilty party.

Much worse is published that we never hear about. It's quite dangerous to believe that one man was responsible for the entire scare. It allows everyone to point the finger at one person and avoid examining what really happened, and this leave the cycle open to being repeated.

https://www.badscience.net/2008/08/the-medias-mmr-hoax/

Nobody is saying he is entirely to blame but his paper is the one that the anti-vaxxers continue to use to defend their claims. Without him they would not be able to say that there is scientific proof for vaccines causing autism

Orion · 20-02-2019 2:48pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Nobody is saying he is entirely to blame but his paper is the one that the anti-vaxxers continue to use to defend their claims. Without him they would not be able to say that there is scientific proof for vaccines causing autism

For measles and mumps outbreaks he is the primary. His fraudulent "study" started this whole campaign against the MMR and is the direct cause many deaths.

And he's still at it despite being completely discredited. The likes of Trump, RFK, etc putting him on a pedestal and that fcuking movie Vaxxed all contribute to these deaths.

ancapailldorcha · 20-02-2019 2:53pm

TheChizler wrote: »

Plenty around before Wakefield, quite a bit of fear around thiomersal in the 90s in the US.

The point is, most people don't read the Lancet, most people get their news on science from newspapers, news reports, lifestyle tv, and tabloids. If you're lucky they quote an opinion from someone who knows what they're talking about, unfortunately not all the time. Not every journalist was complicit, but plenty were. While Wakefield deserves his share of the blame and to be struck off, he's not the only guilty party.

Much worse is published that we never hear about. It's quite dangerous to believe that one man was responsible for the entire scare. It allows everyone to point the finger at one person and avoid examining what really happened, and this leave the cycle open to being repeated.

https://www.badscience.net/2008/08/the-medias-mmr-hoax/

I can appreciate where you're coming from but I agree with Seamus, above. Wakefield was a doctor which lends him a degree of legitimacy, moreso than any other profession. He then went on to commit what was essentially child abuse because he owned a patent on a competing vaccine with the end result being that he's become unbelievably wealthy at the expense of the health of countless children.

Dohnjoe · 24-02-2019 7:22pm

More about measles making a comeback

"Measles returned to Costa Rica after five years by French family who had not had vaccinations"

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/measles-costa-rica-french-tourist-boy-anti-vax-vaccination-who-global-health-threat-infection-mmr-a8794256.html

Igotadose · 24-02-2019 7:31pm

Clark County, WA up to 65 cases. https://www.columbian.com/news/2019/feb/23/clark-county-measles-outbreak-rises-to-65-confirmed-cases/

The sad thing about the Costa Rica story is that the kid in question was on a plane flight, and measles is airborne. Costa Rica says they have pretty good vaccine coverage but this is scary still.

All so avoidable.

mzungu · 24-02-2019 8:48pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

More about measles making a comeback

"Measles returned to Costa Rica after five years by French family who had not had vaccinations"

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/measles-costa-rica-french-tourist-boy-anti-vax-vaccination-who-global-health-threat-infection-mmr-a8794256.html

Selfish people (the parents). Considering they have the money to go on holidays to Costa Rica, I am quite sure they are wealthy enough to afford their child's measles treatment now (better to just have gotten the vaccine in the first place, but logic is never strong with these types). But what about the Costa Rican children that contracted measles in this outbreak? Despite being by far the safest country in the region, it is still a third world nation with a lot of poverty. In cases of outbreak will these children have access to the same standard of care as westerners? I think not.

Dohnjoe · 25-02-2019 3:45pm

Youtube will be taking ads off anti-vaxx videos

Am v glad, looks like they are finally starting down the road of phasing out this type of stuff

PopePalpatine · 25-02-2019 3:46pm

Took them long enough.

I'm sure Gemma and her mates will be ruined by this.

ancapailldorcha · 25-02-2019 3:48pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Youtube will be taking ads off anti-vaxx videos

Am v glad, looks like they are finally starting down the road of phasing out this type of stuff

I think this is a nice middle ground. As much as I despise anti-vaxxers, a large corporation purging services like Youtube of certain opinions can set a bad precedent.

And anyway, it's not about the money!

Anti-vaxxers

Comments