Anti-vaxxers

Seth Brundle · 26-11-2019 8:24am

Graces7 wrote: »

Agree totally. Trusting blindly is a fool's game. As many have found to the cost of their long term health, myself included.

And if all is well? What harm is there in asking pertinent and searching questions?

So if your GP prescribes something for you, what are you going to ask? At what point will you be satisfied that the GP's educated decision should not be questioned by your ill-informed scepticism?
Has it been the case that you did not take prescribed medication because you were not satisfied with your knowledge of the medication?

ancapailldorcha · 26-11-2019 9:32am

stefanovich wrote: »

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_pharmaceutical_settlements

Not trusting big pharma does not make me anti vaccination.

Nobody trusts big pharma. It's why we have agencies which scrutinise their trial data.

Graces7 wrote: »

Agree totally. Trusting blindly is a fool's game. As many have found to the cost of their long term health, myself included.

And if all is well? What harm is there in asking pertinent and searching questions?

I remember what you posted about girls with cervical cancer earlier in this thread. Unfortunately, I don't see myself ever forgetting that so this pretence at being moderate is fooling nobody.

ollkiller · 26-11-2019 10:58am

Graces7 wrote: »

Agree totally. Trusting blindly is a fool's game. As many have found to the cost of their long term health, myself included.

And if all is well? What harm is there in asking pertinent and searching questions?

Hah you're back. I'm off to grab some popcorn. Can't wait to see what you come out with next.

VicMackey1 · 26-11-2019 2:44pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Nobody trusts big pharma. It's why we have agencies which scrutinise their trial data.

It's a problem when some of those agencies cant be fully trusted though! I've seen people who were not anti-vax turn against vaccines because of how these agencies handled the swine flu vaccine.

ancapailldorcha · 26-11-2019 3:20pm

VicMackey1 wrote: »

It's a problem when some of those agencies cant be fully trusted though! I've seen people who were not anti-vax turn against vaccines because of how these agencies handled the swine flu vaccine.

I don't see how supplanting regulators with crackpots and scam artists improves things.

Surely, the best thing to do would be to lobby for the HSE to be held to account.

VicMackey1 · 26-11-2019 6:19pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I don't see how supplanting regulators with crackpots and scam artists improves things.

Surely, the best thing to do would be to lobby for the HSE to be held to account.

I completely agree. Unless there are very large numbers though, lobbying tends to fall on deaf ears! Usually, worst-case scenario for those who should be accountable is resignation on a large pension.

Igotadose · 06-12-2019 12:25pm

Some anti-vax whiners posted 'calling us anti-vaxxers is ruining our fifis.' The internet reacted appropriately: https://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/antivaxxers-are-asking-people-to-stop-calling-them-antivaxxers-because-its-highly-offensive/

ancapailldorcha · 06-12-2019 1:12pm

Would "Pro disease activists" be a suitable alternative or does that marginalise women as well?

Dohnjoe · 06-12-2019 1:15pm

Anti-vaxxer arrested in Samoa

Mr Tamasese had spoken out against vaccines on Facebook, instead promoting using ineffective remedies such as papaya leaf extract to treat the deadly illness.

Before his arrest, he had described the government's mass vaccination programme as "the greatest crime against our people", and falsely claimed vitamin C could cure the infected children.

Samoa's low vaccination rates are in part due to the deaths in 2018 of two children wrongly being attributed to vaccination against measles, mumps and rubella.

However, their deaths were due to nurses mixing the vaccine with a muscle relaxant instead of water, and not the vaccine itself.

The cases had nonetheless raised local fears, and were exploited by people seeking false proof that vaccines are harmful.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-50682881

Igotadose · 06-12-2019 1:20pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Would "Pro disease activists" be a suitable alternative or does that marginalise women as well?

I liked the recommendation to call them bioterrorists.

TheRepentent · 06-12-2019 4:52pm

Meh I'm sticking with vaxtards.

Igotadose · 10-12-2019 10:54am

Great. Now they've come up with "Safe-vaxx" and there's a candidate running for POTUS for the Democratic Party who is in favor of it, Marianne Williamson. https://slate.com/technology/2019/12/marianne-williamson-anti-vax-safe-vax.html

So, the Democrats will have found a way to get me to vote for Trump: send this cretin out as their nominee.

Dohnjoe · 10-12-2019 11:52am

Igotadose wrote: »

Great. Now they've come up with "Safe-vaxx" and there's a candidate running for POTUS for the Democratic Party who is in favor of it, Marianne Williamson. https://slate.com/technology/2019/12/marianne-williamson-anti-vax-safe-vax.html

So, the Democrats will have found a way to get me to vote for Trump: send this cretin out as their nominee.

"I'm just concerned about vaccine safety"

"I'm just asking questions about the Holocaust"

New packaging for the same old denialism

ohnonotgmail · 10-12-2019 11:53am

Dohnjoe wrote: »

"I'm just concerned about vaccine safety"

"I'm just asking questions about the Holocaust"

New packaging for the same old denialism

AKA JAQing

ancapailldorcha · 10-12-2019 11:53am

Dohnjoe wrote: »

"I'm just concerned about vaccine safety"

"I'm just asking questions about the Holocaust"

New packaging for the same old denialism

It's as tedious as it is transparent.

ohnonotgmail · 10-12-2019 1:28pm

Malaysia has just reported its first case of Polio in 27 years. the country was declared polio free in 2000. The village the kid came from has a vaccination rate below 90%. **** the antivaxxers.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/12/malaysia-reports-polio-case-27-years-191208141847707.html

hcf500 · 10-12-2019 6:29pm

Not my words but a statement I mostly agree with

"No wonder vaccine products, which have not been properly safety tested, are being increasingly rejected. Shunned not because of misinformation, but because of the government’s self-inflicted loss of faith, coupled with its deep collusion with pharmaceutical companies where profits over people is their modus operandi."

ohnonotgmail · 10-12-2019 6:34pm

hcf500 wrote: »

Not my words but a statement I mostly agree with

"No wonder vaccine products, which have not been properly safety tested, are being increasingly rejected. Shunned not because of misinformation, but because of the government’s self-inflicted loss of faith, coupled with its deep collusion with pharmaceutical companies where profits over people is their modus operandi."

They are being rejected because anti-vaxxers are quite happy to lie about them.

Igotadose · 10-12-2019 6:39pm

hcf500 wrote: »

Not my words but a statement I mostly agree with

"No wonder vaccine products, which have not been properly safety tested, are being increasingly rejected. Shunned not because of misinformation, but because of the government’s self-inflicted loss of faith, coupled with its deep collusion with pharmaceutical companies where profits over people is their modus operandi."

Then, you need as much help as whoever made this statement. It's a pile of lies and misinformation on *all* topics.

Shunned because OF misinformation
They've been ridiculously safety tested.

Deep collusion with pharmecutical companies - uhuh.

And on, and on. What a pile of bollox. If you spread it, you obviously agree with it.

Dohnjoe · 10-12-2019 7:05pm

hcf500 wrote: »

Not my words but a statement I mostly agree with

"No wonder vaccine products, which have not been properly safety tested, are being increasingly rejected. Shunned not because of misinformation, but because of the government’s self-inflicted loss of faith, coupled with its deep collusion with pharmaceutical companies where profits over people is their modus operandi."

Translation: Vaccines aren't safe because government and "big pharma" are evil and can't be trusted

Reality: Preventable infectious diseases are making a comeback, people are actually dying directly as a result of falsehoods like the above

Ipso · 10-12-2019 7:06pm

Seth Brundle · 10-12-2019 9:21pm

hcf500 wrote: »

Not my words but a statement I mostly agree with

"No wonder vaccine products, which have not been properly safety tested, are being increasingly rejected. Shunned not because of misinformation, but because of the government’s self-inflicted loss of faith, coupled with its deep collusion with pharmaceutical companies where profits over people is their modus operandi."

If that crap isn't your words, who wrote it? (Or are they actually your words?)
Be brave about your beliefs even if they are really really stupid! And wrong!

hcf500 · 10-12-2019 10:58pm

I understand that drug companies bottom line is to make profit and please the shareholders. I don't hold that against them. However the state should not be using taxpayers money to help them and their shareholders profit, and at the same time neglect some of the most vulnerable in the country, children who have had their lives ruined because of a vaccine.

When they were rolling out that vaccine, there is plenty evidence that they blatantly lied and claimed that the vaccine was fully tested when it was not. Are people expected to trust these health authorities that were caught out lying and publishing false information. The public must have lost a lot of faith in the health services and that is completely the fault of the state. There is a huge amount of vaccine dis information also but it is not the sole cause for vaccine hesitancy.

CosmicFool · 10-12-2019 11:00pm

hcf500 wrote: »

I understand that drug companies bottom line is to make profit and please the shareholders. I don't hold that against them. However the state should not be using taxpayers money to help them and their shareholders profit, and at the same time neglect some of the most vulnerable in the country, children who have had their lives ruined because of a vaccine.

When they were rolling out that vaccine, there is plenty evidence that they blatantly lied and claimed that the vaccine was fully tested when it was not. Are people expected to trust these health authorities that were caught out lying and publishing false information. The public must have lost a lot of faith in the health services and that is completely the fault of the state. There is a huge amount of vaccine dis information also but it is not the sole cause for vaccine hesitancy.

Any links to that

Seth Brundle · 10-12-2019 11:04pm

hcf500 wrote: »

I understand that drug companies bottom line is to make profit and please the shareholders. I don't hold that against them. However the state should not be using taxpayers money to help them and their shareholders profit, and at the same time neglect some of the most vulnerable in the country, children who have had their lives ruined because of a vaccine.

When they were rolling out that vaccine, there is plenty evidence that they blatantly lied and claimed that the vaccine was fully tested when it was not. Are people expected to trust these health authorities that were caught out lying and publishing false information. The public must have lost a lot of faith in the health services and that is completely the fault of the state. There is a huge amount of vaccine dis information also but it is not the sole cause for vaccine hesitancy.

...and the earth is flat. FACT!
:rolleyes:

hcf500 · 10-12-2019 11:18pm

Seth Brundle wrote: »

...and the earth is flat. FACT!
:rolleyes:

You might want to double check that fact!

hcf500 · 10-12-2019 11:19pm

CosmicFool wrote: »

Any links to that

http://claredaly.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/IMB-letter-HSE-Sept-2009-Pandemrix.pdf

hcf500 · 10-12-2019 11:54pm

Igotadose wrote: »

Then, you need as much help as whoever made this statement. It's a pile of lies and misinformation on *all* topics.

Shunned because OF misinformation
They've been ridiculously safety tested.

Deep collusion with pharmecutical companies - uhuh.

And on, and on. What a pile of bollox. If you spread it, you obviously agree with it.

http://claredaly.ie/latest-pandemrix-revelations-we-need-answers-from-government-and-justice-for-narcolepsy-sufferers/#more-6688

That link explains exactly what happened with that vaccine. Was it fully tested? No! Yet they claimed it was fully tested! Even when the "pandemic" was officially declared over, the hse still advised gp's to use the vaccine. Seems there is misinformation coming from both sides.

Dohnjoe · 11-12-2019 12:13pm

hcf500 wrote: »

Seems there is misinformation coming from both sides.

You are clearly demonstrating there is one source of disinformation

You are exaggerating one case and leaving out crucial context - that disinformation comes directly from yourself
You are using that case to cast doubt vaccines and medical science in general - more disinformation
You use all of this to spread your personal "evil big pharma" conspiracy narrative - again, more blatant disinformation

ancapailldorcha · 11-12-2019 12:17pm

hcf500 wrote: »

http://claredaly.ie/latest-pandemrix-revelations-we-need-answers-from-government-and-justice-for-narcolepsy-sufferers/#more-6688

That link explains exactly what happened with that vaccine. Was it fully tested? No! Yet they claimed it was fully tested! Even when the "pandemic" was officially declared over, the hse still advised gp's to use the vaccine. Seems there is misinformation coming from both sides.

The only sources I can see in this article are Daly's own blog. There is no equivalence here. The anti-vaxx side are the ones pumping out lies. If anti-vaxxers had any interest in justice or accountability they'd be lobbying their TD instead of spreading their toxic ideology online.

Harry Palmr · 11-12-2019 12:40pm

How many people need to die to show anti vaxxers that they are wrong? Maybe their own children dying is a price worth paying to keep the herd safe.

waxmoth · 11-12-2019 4:22pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Malaysia has just reported its first case of Polio in 27 years. the country was declared polio free in 2000. The village the kid came from has a vaccination rate below 90%. **** the antivaxxers.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/12/malaysia-reports-polio-case-27-years-191208141847707.html

It was not mentioned in the article that this case and the Philippines cases were caused by vaccine derived polioviruses – part of a rapid increase in outbreaks associated with live virus vaccine strains.

Compared with January 2017–June 2018 (3), the number of reported cVDPV outbreaks more than tripled, from nine to 29; 25 (86%) of the outbreaks were caused by cVDPV2. The increase in the number of outbreaks in 2019 resulted from VDPV2 both inside and outside of mOPV2 response areas.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6855511/

ohnonotgmail · 11-12-2019 4:34pm

waxmoth wrote: »

It was not mentioned in the article that this case and the Philippines cases were caused by vaccine derived polioviruses – part of a rapid increase in outbreaks associated with live virus vaccine strains.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6855511/

If the vaccination rate had been sufficient then they would not have caught polio. the lack of vaccinations is the problem.

TheIrishGrover · 11-12-2019 5:28pm

I mean, only for the fact that they are a danger to society, I'd say "F*ck 'em. Darwinism in action. Morons be morons." but they shouldn't be allowed in public.

hcf500 · 11-12-2019 6:59pm

It easy to say the information I am sharing is lies but please point out where these lies are. I shared a link to Clare Daly. Point out the lies there please. You might be surprised but you will not find any! Anyone?

hcf500 · 11-12-2019 7:04pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

You are clearly demonstrating there is one source of disinformation
You are exaggerating one case and leaving out crucial context - that disinformation comes directly from yourself

You are using that case to cast doubt vaccines and medical science in general - more disinformation

You use all of this to spread your personal "evil big pharma" conspiracy narrative - again, more blatant disinformation

1 Where did I exaggerate?
2 Where did I do this?
3 I don't think "big pharma" is evil! Where did you get that idea?

ancapailldorcha · 11-12-2019 7:08pm

hcf500 wrote: »

It easy to say the information I am sharing is lies but please point out where these lies are. I shared a link to Clare Daly. Point out the lies there please. You might be surprised but you will not find any! Anyone?

You just pasted a link and we're supposed to take Daly's opinion as fact. No thanks.

Dohnjoe · 11-12-2019 7:09pm

hcf500 wrote: »

It easy to say the information I am sharing is lies but please point out where these lies are.

You are using your perceptions of isolated cases to cast doubt on the effectiveness of something in general

If you at the very least prefaced your posts with "I know that vaccines are 99.99% safe, however in X case.. " - but you don't

Dohnjoe · 11-12-2019 7:15pm

hcf500 wrote: »

1 Where did I exaggerate?
2 Where did I do this?
3 I don't think "big pharma" is evil! Where did you get that idea?

In your comment here for example (my comments in bold) There is so much wrong with that statement.

"Not my words but a statement I mostly agree with

"No wonder vaccine products, which have not been properly safety tested, out-of-context and spurious generalisation are being increasingly rejected. vaccines are being rejected due anti-vax disinfo and fearmongering Shunned not because of misinformation, false but because of the government’s self-inflicted loss of faith, coupled with its deep collusion with pharmaceutical companies where profits over people is their modus operandi. nonsense allusion to "Big Pharma" conspiracy theory

hcf500 · 11-12-2019 7:37pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

You just pasted a link and we're supposed to take Daly's opinion as fact. No thanks.

You obviously did not make any attempt to read it. If you did you would see that it is not an opinion piece. The letter and the vaccine leaflet that she shared are telling and they are proof of the lies that I mentioned. She goes through the timeline of events surrounding the vaccine. These events happened and have nothing to do with her opinion!

hcf500 · 11-12-2019 7:48pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

In your comment here for example (my comments in bold) There is so much wrong with that statement.

I didn't say I completely agreed with that statement but there is some truth in it.

Better fitting if it said "No wonder vaccine products, some of which have not been properly safety tested"

Vaccines are not solely being rejected because of "anti-vax disinfo and fearmongering". Trust has a part to play too

You keep talking about a "big pharma" conspiracy. I never mentioned anything about a conspiracy, only about government corruption!

Dohnjoe · 11-12-2019 8:28pm

hcf500 wrote: »

I
Better fitting if it said "No wonder vaccine products, some of which have not been properly safety tested"

Correction - very, very few of which. The dishonesty is extraordinary.

Vaccines are not solely being rejected because of "anti-vax disinfo and fearmongering". Trust has a part to play too

More playing with words.

There is no reason whatsoever to distrust vaccines in general. If there is a specific issue with a specific vaccine or a specific batch - that's a specific issue. Not a general one.

You keep talking about a "big pharma" conspiracy. I never mentioned anything about a conspiracy, only about government corruption!

You alluded to it when you posted an agreement with this wafer-thin nonsense

"because of the government’s self-inflicted loss of faith, coupled with its deep collusion with pharmaceutical companies where profits over people is their modus operandi."

hcf500 · 12-12-2019 10:07am

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Correction - very, very few of which. The dishonesty is extraordinary.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

More playing with words.

You are the one playing with words

Dohnjoe wrote: »

There is no reason whatsoever to distrust vaccines in general. If there is a specific issue with a specific vaccine or a specific batch - that's a specific issue. Not a general one.

No there is no reason to distrust vaccines in general. I never said there was. For someone who was sitting on the fence regarding having their child vaccinated though, the actions of the government during the recent court case could have been enough to tip the scales. There must even be pro vaxxers who distrust the health services after this.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

You alluded to it when you posted an agreement with this wafer-thin nonsense

"because of the government’s self-inflicted loss of faith, coupled with its deep collusion with pharmaceutical companies where profits over people is their modus operandi."

Conspiracy. No! I never even said the word. Collusion. Yes. The government protected GSKs profits and their interests when they completely covered GSKs legal defence costs. They would rather protect GSK than their own citizens.

Its very easy for you to argue points I didn't make. There is no conspiracy here.

hcf500 · 12-12-2019 10:10am

Im still waiting for someone to point out all of Clare Dalys lies in the link I posted!

ancapailldorcha · 12-12-2019 11:05am

hcf500 wrote: »

Im still waiting for someone to point out all of Clare Dalys lies in the link I posted!

Your tactic of dumping a link and proclaiming it gospel won't fly here I'm afraid. Can you link to a scientific study proving that Pandemrix causes Narcolepsy?

Dohnjoe · 12-12-2019 11:50am

hcf500 wrote: »

No there is no reason to distrust vaccines in general.

Good

Collusion. Yes. The government protected GSKs profits and their interests when they completely covered GSKs legal defence costs. They would rather protect GSK than their own citizens.

Isolated debatable example.

It's not policy. It's not inherent. Governments, regulators and pharmaceutical companies take safety extremely seriously. Unfortunately breaches, lapses and oversight can happen with anything - it doesn't mean it's systemic.

You might want to think about that the next time you agree with some garbage conspiracy statement that tenuously implies it is systemic.

CramCycle · 12-12-2019 12:34pm

Better fitting if it said "No wonder vaccine products, some of which have not been properly safety tested"

They were tested and the company themselves pointed out potential issues, hence the indemnity clause. They refused to sell it to Ireland on this basis. The HSE rightly or wrongly went on the balance of probabilities that the vaccine was the safer option. Hindsight is wonderful.

Vaccines are not solely being rejected because of "anti-vax disinfo and fearmongering". Trust has a part to play too

Mainly just fearmongering. Vaccines are safe. There are side effects for all medications. A reasonable and balanced person would weight up the risk vs reward. With almost all vaccines, the reward to society far outweighs the minute number of reactions. Great video earlier on in the thread explaining it. Here it is, this is for the Measles Vaccine, the numbers are different for different diseases but the principle is the same, I suggest starting just before the 5 minute mark to get the hard numbers:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBkVCpbNnkU

You keep talking about a "big pharma" conspiracy. I never mentioned anything about a conspiracy, only about government corruption!

What specific corruption though, there were no benefits to politicians other than to be seen to act which is their job. This isn't corruption unless you are suggesting that they got brown envelopes to indemnify the company. That is quite a claim considering the risk to the company if it were ever shown or hinted at.

hcf500 · 12-12-2019 1:59pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Your tactic of dumping a link and proclaiming it gospel won't fly here I'm afraid. Can you link to a scientific study proving that Pandemrix causes Narcolepsy?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4266499/
There have been scientific studies carried out which show that Pandemrix had higher amounts of viral nucleoproteins and an increased response to these nucleoproteins in children with narcolepsy compared to Arepanrix, another swine flu vaccine which did not cause any increase in narcolepsy. There have been numerous epidemiological studies also which show a very strong link between the two. Although it is impossible for epidemiological studies to 100% prove that pandemrix caused the huge increase in narcolepsy, the studies were strong enough for the medical community to accept the connection and for most countries to accept and pay compensation to the victims.

What is your view on the promotional leaflet claiming that pandemrix was fully tested, which was distributed shortly after the IMB sent CMO Dr Tony Holohan a letter warning him of the lack of data and testing on the pandemrix vaccine?

Letter from the IMB

HSE Leaflet

hcf500 · 12-12-2019 2:08pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Good

Isolated debatable example.

It's not policy. It's not inherent. Governments, regulators and pharmaceutical companies take safety extremely seriously. Unfortunately breaches, lapses and oversight can happen with anything - it doesn't mean it's systemic.

You might want to think about that the next time you agree with some garbage conspiracy statement that tenuously implies it is systemic.

Looks like the Chief Medical Officer or the HPRA weren't too bothered about safety when they advised Doctors to use the vaccine as late as 2011!

hcf500 · 12-12-2019 2:22pm

CramCycle wrote: »

They were tested and the company themselves pointed out potential issues, hence the indemnity clause. They refused to sell it to Ireland on this basis. The HSE rightly or wrongly went on the balance of probabilities that the vaccine was the safer option. Hindsight is wonderful.

H5N1 was tested in mock up trials. Not H1N1

CramCycle wrote: »

What specific corruption though, there were no benefits to politicians other than to be seen to act which is their job. This isn't corruption unless you are suggesting that they got brown envelopes to indemnify the company. That is quite a claim considering the risk to the company if it were ever shown or hinted at.

Maybe they didn't benefit in the form of a brown envelope, but they put their own public image above the safety of the people. Their was a recession at the time and they did not want to dump a vaccine that they spent millions on, so they advised GPs to use it for the annual flu vaccination even though there were very strong safety concerns over the vaccine at the time. That is corruption!

Anti-vaxxers

Comments