[Sivad]

Really? How interesting. Well that’s a bit bullshit isn’t it. If your kid wants a vaccine, give them a vaccine. Geez, why is everything so hard these days?

I don't know about that, children don't have the maturity for proper informed consent. I just had to go war with my nephew's school and his grandparents because the fucking babbitt quack school psychologist wanted to put him on amphetamines for ADHD and had talked them all into it. I don't leave important shit to children or idiots or babbitt quacks to decide, since I'm the only one who does any real thinking in my family, I'm the one who makes the decisions.

[Sivad]

attorney: If you don’t know whether DTaP or Tdap cause autism, shouldn’t you wait until you do know, until you have the science to support it to then say vaccine don’t cause autism?

Dr. Plotkin: Do I wait? No. I have to take into account the health of the child.

attorney: And so for that reason, you are okay telling the parent that DTaP, Tdap does not cause autism even though the science isn’t there yet to support that claim.”
​
Dr. Plotkin: Absolutely. ​

[Drlee]

Fear tactics and bullying is a violation of informed consent and is extremely unethical

An antivaxer is not using informed consent. They are idiots who have, with absolutely no justification decided to ignore some of the best science ever and endanger themselves, their kids and their community. Anyone acting on "informed consent" would have their kids vaccinated.

but since the babbitts can't argue the facts because the facts aren't on their side all they really can do is resort to manipulation and coercion.

What garbage but I see you worked in your new big word.

I despise liars but there is a special place in hell for babbitts who trick people into subjecting their children to untested and unproven preventatives.

Your position is that of a dangerous fool. What is the point of arguing with someone whose confirmation bias is so great that he spends his days breathlessly googling in the hope he can find some malcontent with a degree to argue against the entire medical and public health establishment of the world.

Well. It is a world filled with fools. The key is to force them to behave so they don't kill the rest of us. If that makes these special snowflakes sad or takes away some imagined right then that is too bad. They can just get over it or wallow in despair. I really could not care less about antivaxers. They are not intelligent enough to waste my time on. I only post here lest they lead someone else to make a potentially devastating decision.

[noemon]

I just had to go war with my nephew's school and his grandparents because the fucking babbitt quack school psychologist wanted to put him on amphetamines for ADHD and had talked them all into it.

That I can agree with, but that is not a vaccination. It is an entirely separate conversation. My kids and myself this summer suffered from MRSA because my stupid Greek-American anti-vax cousin would refuse to give antibiotics to her son and instead opted to go with a garlic treatment. I put my kids in quarantine for 5 days to avoid her child with whom they are best friends until I was hoping the anti-biotics would work, only to find out on the 5th day that she is not treating him with antibiotics at all and having my boys cry because these kids were leaving soon for the US I decided against my better judgment to let them join each other at the beach. We all then got fucking MRSA because of such stupidity, both mine to let them but especially hers to leave the child untreated with such an aggressive super bug.

[Pants-of-dog]

Really? How interesting. Well that’s a bit bullshit isn’t it. If your kid wants a vaccine, give them a vaccine. Geez, why is everything so hard these days?

Because some parents feel that their “rights” are more important than the health if their children.

And some of these children disagree.

——————————-

Another Study Shows Tdap Vaccine Not Linked to Autism Risk

A new study published in the journal Pediatrics has found that Tdap vaccinations for pregnant women do not increase the risk of autism spectrum disorder in their children.

The study assessed more than 80,000 children born between 2011 and 2014 at Kaiser Permanente Southern California hospitals.

Children of mothers who received the Tdap vaccine while pregnant were no more likely to develop autism than children of mothers who did not receive the vaccine while pregnant.

In fact, the prevalence of autism was slightly lower in children of Tdap-vaccinated mothers.

[Drlee]

In fact, the prevalence of autism was slightly lower in children of Tdap-vaccinated mothers.

Excellent!

Since the profoundly stupid anti-vaxers obviously are inclined to make bad decisions, I wonder (just wonder) if the slightly higher autism rates in those not vaccinated may be related to the obvious stupidity of their parents. I wonder what other destructive behaviors they exhibit.

[Sivad]

That I can agree with, but that is not a vaccination.

No, it's the same. They churned out a bunch of junk science saying it's safe to give amphetamines to children and all the retards just go with it, no questions asked.

My kids and myself this summer suffered from MRSA because my stupid Greek-American anti-vax cousin would refuse to give antibiotics to her son and instead opted to go with a garlic treatment.

Your cousin is a fucking idiot but no more of an idiot than someone who gives their kids vaccines without at least reading the IOM reports. Only a total jackass would vaccinate their children without first thoroughly researching it. Anyone who takes a babbitt's word for anything is too stupid to live.

[Sivad]

A new study published in the journal Pediatrics has found that Tdap vaccinations for pregnant women do not increase the risk of autism spectrum disorder in their children.

They churn out underpowered junk science on a regular and then you go read the IOM analysis of it and it says "lacks internal validity" or "weak evidence". Seriously, go read the IOM reports, they shit all over the quality of these so called studies.

[Sivad]

Your position is that of a dangerous fool.

I almost forgot to laugh at you about that post you made where you were trying to show off your professional epidemiology. That was some of the funniest pofo I've seen yet, you don't even understand basic pharmacovigilance, total fucking joke.

[Pants-of-dog]

Here is a link to the actual study:

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/c ... /e20180120

[Drlee]

@Sivad
You of all people are not qualified to evaluate my qualifications. You do not even know what they are in the first place. But, of course, you did not intend to be smart. Just insulting.

But look! You learned another big word! "Pharmacovigilance". And miss used it as usual.

Smart people will take comfort in knowing that there are few drugs/devices receiving the same level of study and monitoring than vaccines. The fact that Sivad does not understand how this is done and by whom does not mean it is not happening.

No, it's the same. They churned out a bunch of junk science saying it's safe to give amphetamines to children and all the retards just go with it, no questions asked.

This is interesting but typical of the anti vaxers. They find one drug that is widely questioned by researchers and then conclude that all drugs are bad because researchers do not question their validity. Fortunately most people can ignore these crackpots.

Would I give my child stimulants? Maybe. Maybe not. I would certainly get a second opinion. But this has absolutely nothing to do with vaccines. Zero. Zip. Nada.

[Pants-of-dog]

From Snopes:

Is Autism Now Disclosed as a DTaP Vaccine Side Effect?

Claim:
Autism has now been included among the known side effects of the DTaP (Diphtheria, Tetanus, and acellular Pertussis) vaccine.

Rating
False
About this rating

Origin
On 10 March 2016, a nondescript WordPress blog post reporting that “autism was now disclosed and acknowledged as an adverse event reported for use of DTaP (Diphtheria, Tetanus, and acellular Pertussis) vaccine” was published by an anonymous blogger. The item primarily consisted of a sensationalist title (which suggested a new development in 2016), along with the following text and image:


There’s widespread and growing lack of confidence in the safety of vaccines …

Know anyone who still believes that vaccines can’t cause autism?

Take a look at the DTaP vaccine insert:




Predictably, it wasn’t long before the blog post began popping up in anti-vaccine circles on social media under headlines such as “FDA announces vaccines cause autism” and “Now it’s official: FDA announced that vaccines are causing autism!” Readers didn’t need to scan past the misleading titles to catch the thrust of the claims: The headlines insinuated that autism had recently been added to the list of known adverse affects asssociated with the DTaP, quietly confirming what science-based medical information had supposedly denied for so long.

It was true that the photograph appended to that article matched the insert available for Tripedia, Diphtheria and Tetanus Toxoids and Acellular Pertussis Vaccine Adsorbed (DTaP) as shown on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s web site [PDF]: (P-o-d: the link on the Snopes website no longer works. This link provides the same PDF.)

Also true was the fact that visible selective emphasis highlighted information favorable to anti-vaxxers while failing to include crucial context (namely that the listed effect was a post-approval, unverified user-reported one that does not “establish a causal relationship to components of Tripedia vaccine”):



We contacted UC Hastings law professor and immunization law expert Dorit Rubenstein Reiss about the claim, who directed us to a related passage in the Tripedia insert. While the blog highlighted Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) alongside autism as reported adverse effects, directly beneath the referenced passage was information that the rate of SIDS was lower among vaccinated infants than among unvaccinated ones:


In the German case-control study and US open-label safety study in which 14,971 infants received Tripedia vaccine, 13 deaths in Tripedia vaccine recipients were reported. Causes of deaths included seven SIDS, and one of each of the following: enteritis, Leigh Syndrome, adrenogenital syndrome, cardiac arrest, motor vehicle accident, and accidental drowning. All of these events occurred more than two weeks post immunization. The rate of SIDS observed in the German case-control study was 0.4/1,000 vaccinated infants. The rate of SIDS observed in the US open-label safety study was 0.8/1,000 vaccinated infants and the reported rate of SIDS in the US from 1985-1991 was 1.5/1,000 live births. By chance alone, some cases of SIDS can be expected to follow receipt of whole-cell pertussis DTP35 or DTaP vaccines.


Another aspect of the vaccine excerpt reproduced above was that automobile accidents and drownings were included among the causes of reported deaths that occurred after vaccination, which underscores that the nature of such statistics is an inclusive one encompassing adverse events which clearly have no causal relationship with vaccine.

Reiss also pointed us to the FDA’s guidance on adverse event-related drug labeling [PDF], which states:

The ADVERSE REACTIONS section must list adverse reactions identified from domestic and foreign spontaneous reports. This listing must be separate from the listing of adverse reactions identified in clinical trials and must also be preceded by information necessary to interpret the adverse reactions. To help practitioners interpret the significance of data obtained from postmarketing spontaneous reports, the following statement, or an appropriate modification, should precede these data:


Contains Nonbinding Recommendations 8 The following adverse reactions have been identified during postapproval use of drug X. Because these reactions are reported voluntarily from a population of uncertain size, it is not always possible to reliably estimate their frequency or establish a causal relationship to drug exposure.


When we asked Reiss whether adverse event labeling included all documented reports whether or not they were linked to the drug in question, she confirmed that “the insert lists events reported even if causation evidence is sketchy. It actually says so.”

....

The Snopes article goes on much longer.

But this part shows that Dtap is not linked with autism, and the confusion is because anti-vaxxers think all adverse events are causally related.

This fallacy has a long latin name, but the idea is that people incorrectly think that since X happens before Y, X causes Y.

“The vaccine happened before the autism symptoms, so the vaccine caused the autism”.

But it makes no sense because X can happen before Y withut causing Y.

“I wore red pants on Tuesday, and had a taco on Wednesday.”

Obviously, the red pants did not cause the taco.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_ho ... c#Examples

[Sivad]

@Sivad
You of all people are not qualified to evaluate my qualifications. You do not even know what they are in the first place. But, of course, you did not intend to be smart. Just insulting.

But look! You learned another big word! "Pharmacovigilance". And miss used it as usual.

Oh, I'm gonna definitely rip into that post and we're all gonna see exactly who's talking Noemon Edit: Rule 2 Violation

and you still haven't addressed Spitzer's criticisms, I wonder why?

[Pants-of-dog]

A lot of the arguments from anti-vaxxers seem to rely on outdated information.

Walter Spitzer died in 2006, thirteen years ago and four years before the Lancet published a retraction of the Wakefield study.

[Pants-of-dog]

For example, the Tripedia/autism claim was based on a safety insert from 2005.

The fact that anti-vaxxers did not notice it until 2015 shows how they keep up with the latest news.

[ness31]

Pinterest has blocked searches relating to vaccinations in an effort to curb misinformation. If you want a source, find it yourself as I don’t know what counts as “misinformation” these days

[Drlee]

Pinterest has blocked searches relating to vaccinations in an effort to curb misinformation. If you want a source, find it yourself as I don’t know what counts as “misinformation” these days

Easy answer.

Let me ask you a question. If you had a pain behind your right eye, who would you go to? My guess is your doctor. Not Pinterest. Right? If you want information about the severity of the flu this year you would not go to ebay. You would likely go to the CDC website where there is actually an extensive section devoted to the flu. It says, by the way, that they estimate flu deaths in the first four months of this season at as many as 19,000 Americans.) You might check with the Mayo Clinic site or Web MD. There are others.

We all know that there are websites devoted to just about every crackpot idea out there. On the subject of vaccinations one particularly bad site is "A Voice For Choice". It supposedly supports the right to make an informed choice. The site is rife with information that is simply wrong. For example. It tells parents that their babies will get aluminium (which they claim is a "neurotoxin") at a level deemed "unsafe by the FDA" from vaccinations! Well. They will get it. About 4 milligrams in the first year of life. That sounds bad. But. The fail to tell parents that aluminium is naturally occurring in breast milk in much greater quantities. Or that the average adult ingest more than double this amount every day from food.

This same website cites Dr. William Thompson and calls him a whistle blower for his claims of an association between MMR and autism in African American children. And the cite omits the fact that the study was withdrawn due to concerns about its validity during peer review. In other words, Thompson was wrong and admits it.

There is an amazing website I can refer you to: The Center for Vaccine Ethics & Policy. Read about it. Great information there.

Governance for the Center is led by Arthur L. Caplan, PhD, Head, Division of Medical Ethics, NYU Medical School, and the Drs. William F. and Virginia Connolly Mitty Professor of Bioethics, NYU Department of Population; and Dr. Paul A. Offit, professor of pediatrics in the Division of Infectious Diseases at The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP), the Maurice R. Hilleman Professor of Vaccinology at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, and Director of CHOP’s Vaccine Education Center. The Center’s Executive Director is David R. Curry, MS.

An Advisory Board provides additional oversight for CVEP and currently includes Dr. Stanley A. Plotkin, MD, Emeritus Professor of the University of Pennsylvania; Walter A. Orenstein, MD, Professor of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine and Associate Director, Emory Vaccine Center; Russel E. Kaufman, M.D. President Emeritus, Wistar Institute, and Christian Loucq, MD, former Director General, International Vaccine Institute (IVI).

Are they industry stooges? They get money from industry. In short. No. In fact, they studiously document all of their support and expressly reject influence in the form of corporate donations.

So there are sources out there. Lots of them. But one should not decide on the validity of a site based upon it position on a google search.

When I was a young person we had an extreme disadvantage in gathering information. Before the net we had to actually find hard copy resources and read the whole thing. So we had less information. But. We had an advantage too. We had to read the whole thing to get our information. There was not asearch algorithm deciding what I ought to see. The reason places like the aforementioned "A voice for Choice" exist at all is that search engines like Google give them an instant audience. And sometimes, the more outrageous the site is, the higher they rank. Many have come to see Google rank as tantamount to credibility. That is a huge mistake.

One of the things that professionals in this field (or any scientific field for that matter) do is look into the nooks and crannies of the available research. They are not basing their opinions on page one Google searches.

Number three on a Google search in a purchased position is a site called "Children's Health Defense". Who doen't want that. It is a very authoritative looking site. Yet on the very first statement that they make they say this:

The long-term health effects of our vaccine program are inadequately studied and our regulatory bodies are conflicted. Childhood health epidemics have mushroomed along with the childhood vaccine schedule. Vaccines contain many ingredients, some of which are known to be neurotoxic, carcinogenic and cause autoimmunity. Vaccines injuries can and do happen. The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program of Health and Human Services (HHS) has awarded almost $4 billion for vaccine injuries since 1988.

Is this true? Well. Not really. It is a deliberate distortion.

The long-term health effects of our vaccine program are inadequately studied and our regulatory bodies are conflicted.

This is patently wrong. There is nothing at all conflicted about our "regulatory bodies" which I note they do not identify.

Childhood health epidemics have mushroomed along with the childhood vaccine schedule.

What "epidemics"? I know of none. What has not "mushroomed" is the veritable plague of childhood death and injury that we formerly had before vaccination. I'll see your autism and raise you polio and diphtheria.

Vaccines contain many ingredients, some of which are known to be neurotoxic, carcinogenic and cause autoimmunity.

So does broccoli. None of these things are present in vaccines in dangerous quantities. And, oh by the way, what does "cause autoimmunity" actually mean medically? It is gibberish. That is what it means.

Vaccines injuries can and do happen. The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program of Health and Human Services (HHS) has awarded almost $4 billion for vaccine injuries since 1988.

This is a pittance. If you look at 2017 it is pennies per vaccination given. And compared to the cost of not vaccinating? It is simply a joke.

But that site is what some would like parents to read to make an "informed choice".

So. There you have it. The way you do it is to go to the real experts and take their recommendations. A person who would never even think of driving their car after their mechanic said their tires were unsafe, will leave their child in danger of the flu (which kills almost three times as many people as all car accidents combined) because of some infinitesimal chance that he/she might have a reaction to the vaccine. It defies credulity.

[XogGyux]

Easy answer.

Let me ask you a question. If you had a pain behind your right eye, who would you go to? My guess is your doctor. Not Pinterest. Right? If you want information about the severity of the flu this year you would not go to ebay. You would likely go to the CDC website where there is actually an extensive section devoted to the flu. It says, by the way, that they estimate flu deaths in the first four months of this season at as many as 19,000 Americans.) You might check with the Mayo Clinic site or Web MD. There are others.

All of this I agree + I'll add another caveat, even when sources are credible and reputable people should be very careful with how they use this information. Even the best articles from the most reputable sources are not a substitution for medical expertise and judgment. While I do support people to read as much as they can to inform themselves about their conditions, possible treatments, prognosis, etc.... people should be careful not to fall into "Dr. Google" claw. Even with the best, most accurate books on engineering I could not build a house (at least, certainly not one I would be willing to stay inside ) So even with the right books/journals/articles a random people from the street cannot come up with accurate diagnosis and proper management.

[Sivad]

Easy answer.

Let me ask you a question. If you had a pain behind your right eye, who would you go to? My guess is your doctor. Not Pinterest. Right? If you want information about the severity of the flu this year you would not go to ebay. You would likely go to the CDC website where there is actually an extensive section devoted to the flu.

Or you could just go to the IOM and find out that science establishing safety and efficacy is woefully lacking. And I certainly wouludn't base anything on what the CDC says before I thoroughly researched the structure and integrity of that agency. When you do look into the CDC you find massive scandals, revolving doors, institutionalized corruption, and heinous lies that have jeopardized the public health and killed and injured many many people(and I'm not talking about vaccines).

[Sivad]

FYI, the most preeminent epidemiologist in the whole pofo world, Drlee, will mock you if you research vaccines through google and learn and use vaccine related terminology.