Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Religion
 Religion versus vaccines--sound familiar?
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Previous Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 10

Ghost_Skeptic
SFN Regular

Canada
510 Posts

Posted - 02/22/2007 :  02:29:24   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Ghost_Skeptic a Private Message
This is a bit OT, but here is a real audio file from The Current about Anti Vaccination Islamic Fundamentalists in Pakistan are getting in the way of campaing to send polio the way of smallpox. Interesting is how the vaccinators are fighting fire with fire be getting a Fatwah in their favor. It also contains a bit about past anti vaccination scares.

Rotary International are very involved in the effort to wipe to polio - I wonder if this why Hamas considers them to in the same Evil Zionist conspiracy boat as the Masons?

"You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. / You can send a kid to college but you can't make him think." - B.B. King

History is made by stupid people - The Arrogant Worms

"The greater the ignorance the greater the dogmatism." - William Osler

"Religion is the natural home of the psychopath" - Pat Condell

"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter" - Thomas Jefferson
Go to Top of Page

Original_Intent
SFN Regular

USA
609 Posts

Posted - 02/22/2007 :  05:53:13   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Original_Intent a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Neurosis

quote:

Not once have I said that it should note be available. Not once have i said it encourages premarital sex.


Right and I wasn't talking to you about that. I was talking about it period. I was saying that you are claiming I have said something I haven't, that I am for forcing the vaccine onto people. When all I have said is that it is a good idea for everyone to be vaccinated in order to reduce or prevent cervical cancer.


I do not recall reading where, or accusing you of, trying to force this on people.
quote:

quote:

What I have said it is largely preventable by choice, and it is a choice itslef. I have said that the forcing of this, IMHO, is wrong.

And I said that it is an invisible disease that is spread without the spreaders knowledge. It is retarded to expect people to remain truly monogamous all of their life.

That is a fundamental difirence between us. I expect people to act like people, and control themselves, I expect people to accept the outcome of the risks of their actions.

quote:
quote:

Gymnastics, that's rich....... But you are right. All those really cool moves, in and of themselves are, well, cool as hell. When they combine them, they get cooler. When they try to combin the wrong ones, they get hurt.


[Sigh...] You have no understanding of chemistry and should go read something before saying anymore of the subject. Chemist can study how chemicals interact in a lab and guess what, they already know how the chemicals in the vaccine interact with one another and the body, and have been able to study this in real patients for a while since they have been administered in other vaccines, which have not produced any birth defects or any other problem. You just don't understand how conclusions are reached by tests in the lab and those tests are comparible to the use in the population. Chemicals will always react the way they do everytime without fail ever. It is the laws of nature.


Sigh...
I think the Merck deal is just another example of why I question what scientists have to say. We'll do it, because it is for the greater good. Then, "What, you aren't going to pay for it?"

quote:
quote:

And you are saying there is no risk where there is no proof there isn't one.


No, I am saying that there is no evidence for a risk in this case and there is plenty of evidence that there is not a risk.


Get back to me in 10 years on this one.

quote:
quote:

Damn, you are fixated on Shingles, and perhaps thaat is my fault. I am not talking about just shingles, I am talking about people having serious health issues from chicken-pox as an adult.


And I am saying that people who get vaccinated are at little risk of ever getting chicken pox again, or shingles as it would present. It is also the same risk that people who catch it during childhood are at, and that people who have had neither are at orders of magnitude higher risk. I am also saying that chicken pox in old age is not a high threat. My 76 year old grandma got shingles (she was 70 at the time) and survived just fine. I have seen a few (four) other people get it at different ages also, with no problem. Also, of these four three had it as a child and one never had it. So in reality your worry over a shingles epidemic is stupid, but not as stupid as your avian flu worries.


Damn, you are still fixated on shingles. I am more worried about the increased chnace of serious health complications and death.

Peace
Joe
Go to Top of Page

Neurosis
SFN Regular

USA
675 Posts

Posted - 02/22/2007 :  11:56:30   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Neurosis an AOL message Send Neurosis a Private Message
quote:


I do not recall reading where, or accusing you of, trying to force this on people.



Probably not. I meant to say that you are grouping me into that category because I am agruing its safety. You can be against compulsory vaccinations, but not over safety in the case of HPV. Which is not to say that I am for compulsory vaccinations for HPV.
quote:
That is a fundamental difirence between us. I expect people to act like people, and control themselves, I expect people to accept the outcome of the risks of their actions.


And you assuse me of utopianism! Well, the history of mankind speaks to the irresponsibility of mankind, especially teenagers especially now.
quote:
Sigh...
I think the Merck deal is just another example of why I question what scientists have to say. We'll do it, because it is for the greater good. Then, "What, you aren't going to pay for it?"


Of course, they should pay for it. Everyone should pay for everything they get, even healthcare. No one deserves the best house, the best car, or the best healthcare. We should have treatment available for severe life threatening cases, but guardasil only prevents a non-life-threatening disease that could lead to cervical cancer. The Merk deal is a good example of science before a bad one. Everything in capitalism is for profit. If you honestly blame science because it mostly produces things that can be sold, then your problem is with capitalism not science.
quote:
Get back to me in 10 years on this one.

I'll send you a link to a tin foil hat site. You are killing me here. By your own logic you should never again try another new pre-packaged food product, or a new food dish in a restaurant. Obviously, you like being distrusting so much you distrust for no reason but the emotional fulfillment.
quote:
Damn, you are still fixated on shingles. I am more worried about the increased chnace of serious health complications and death.

Oh yea, the non-existenct non-evidenced threats that you invent.

Facts! Pssh, you can prove anything even remotely true with facts.
- Homer Simpson

[God] is an infinite nothing from nowhere with less power over our universe than the secretary of agriculture.
- Prof. Frink

Lisa: Yes, but wouldn't you rather know the truth than to delude yourself for happiness?
Marge: Well... um.... [goes outside to jump on tampoline with Homer.]
Edited by - Neurosis on 02/22/2007 11:58:26
Go to Top of Page

Original_Intent
SFN Regular

USA
609 Posts

Posted - 02/22/2007 :  15:40:47   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Original_Intent a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Neurosis

quote:


I do not recall reading where, or accusing you of, trying to force this on people.



Probably not. I meant to say that you are grouping me into that category because I am agruing its safety. You can be against compulsory vaccinations, but not over safety in the case of HPV. Which is not to say that I am for compulsory vaccinations for HPV.


Cool. Then, at this time, we can agree on that!
quote:

quote:
That is a fundamental difirence between us. I expect people to act like people, and control themselves, I expect people to accept the outcome of the risks of their actions.


And you assuse me of utopianism! Well, the history of mankind speaks to the irresponsibility of mankind, especially teenagers especially now.

No, don't take me wrong. I should have said, I do not expect society to carry the bulk of the weight of irresponsibility.
quote:

quote:
Sigh...
I think the Merck deal is just another example of why I question what scientists have to say. We'll do it, because it is for the greater good. Then, "What, you aren't going to pay for it?"


Of course, they should pay for it. Everyone should pay for everything they get, even healthcare. No one deserves the best house, the best car, or the best healthcare. We should have treatment available for severe life threatening cases, but guardasil only prevents a non-life-threatening disease that could lead to cervical cancer. The Merk deal is a good example of science before a bad one. Everything in capitalism is for profit. If you honestly blame science because it mostly produces things that can be sold, then your problem is with capitalism not science.


I am not talking about the fact they want to make a buck. I am talking about the attempted manipulation of the taxpayers. It is a good example of because of this.

And to make myself clear, I am not denegrating the scientists who came up with the drug, but the company.
quote:

quote:
Damn, you are still fixated on shingles. I am more worried about the increased chnace of serious health complications and death.

Oh yea, the non-existenct non-evidenced threats that you invent.



I sincerely hope you are right. Could you imagine what would happen if these folks started catching chicken pox when they hit 60?

Go to Top of Page

Neurosis
SFN Regular

USA
675 Posts

Posted - 02/22/2007 :  16:24:19   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Neurosis an AOL message Send Neurosis a Private Message
quote:

I am not talking about the fact they want to make a buck. I am talking about the attempted manipulation of the taxpayers. It is a good example of because of this.

And to make myself clear, I am not denegrating the scientists who came up with the drug, but the company.


Are you talking about Merk?
quote:
I sincerely hope you are right. Could you imagine what would happen if these folks started catching chicken pox when they hit 60?


The same thing that happened to my grandma, nothing. She got shingles. Also, since there would be a very small percentage that would get chicken pox twice period, and an even smaller chance as they age and yet still have not caught it, the very very few who may be at risk to get shingles (which is no fault of the vaccine but of the immune system desensitizing) will either make it fine or die. So the very very very few people who will catch chicken pox at 60 may die, but only because of being so weak which means they would be dying of pneumonia if they caught it anyway, and there is orders of magnitude more chance of them catching pnuemonia.

Facts! Pssh, you can prove anything even remotely true with facts.
- Homer Simpson

[God] is an infinite nothing from nowhere with less power over our universe than the secretary of agriculture.
- Prof. Frink

Lisa: Yes, but wouldn't you rather know the truth than to delude yourself for happiness?
Marge: Well... um.... [goes outside to jump on tampoline with Homer.]
Go to Top of Page

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9666 Posts

Posted - 02/22/2007 :  17:20:09   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
Sigh...
I think the Merck deal is just another example of why I question what scientists have to say. We'll do it, because it is for the greater good. Then, "What, you aren't going to pay for it?"


So your gripe isn't really against scientists, but pharmaceutical companies that run their business for profits. Are you simply comfusing the two?

Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Go to Top of Page

Original_Intent
SFN Regular

USA
609 Posts

Posted - 02/23/2007 :  06:29:18   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Original_Intent a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse

quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
Sigh...
I think the Merck deal is just another example of why I question what scientists have to say. We'll do it, because it is for the greater good. Then, "What, you aren't going to pay for it?"


So your gripe isn't really against scientists, but pharmaceutical companies that run their business for profits. Are you simply comfusing the two?



No, it is a side (OT) gripe.
The gripe is the inability to take science at it's word. Merck is an example. It is little difirent then any other philosiphy that is "looking out for my best intrests." It is corrupt, and must be looked at from that angle. What is the risk in the trust or lackof, what is the reward.

There is a difirence between reccomending your product because it is the best thing since apple pie, and making money off of it; and attempting to manipulate the taxpayers into driving your sales and withdrawing when the manipulation won't work.

Peace
Joe
Go to Top of Page

Neurosis
SFN Regular

USA
675 Posts

Posted - 02/23/2007 :  11:12:42   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Neurosis an AOL message Send Neurosis a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent

quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse

quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
Sigh...
I think the Merck deal is just another example of why I question what scientists have to say. We'll do it, because it is for the greater good. Then, "What, you aren't going to pay for it?"


So your gripe isn't really against scientists, but pharmaceutical companies that run their business for profits. Are you simply comfusing the two?



No, it is a side (OT) gripe.
The gripe is the inability to take science at it's word. Merck is an example. It is little difirent then any other philosiphy that is "looking out for my best intrests." It is corrupt, and must be looked at from that angle. What is the risk in the trust or lackof, what is the reward.

There is a difirence between reccomending your product because it is the best thing since apple pie, and making money off of it; and attempting to manipulate the taxpayers into driving your sales and withdrawing when the manipulation won't work.

Peace
Joe



Science is a method not a world view. Scientists are method users not philosophers. There is no philosophy that is in your best interest. All philosophies can be used to manipulate, and are often used that way.

Trusting the data is different than trusting the data presenters. The vaccine is a good idea for people because it would reduce the likelihood of cervical cancer. Merk would make money either way, but more so probably as a compulsory vaccine. It is no different than a millionaire using a government program to purchase real estate. The money is available. In this case it wasn't, and the deal fell through. That is good because unnecessary government spending is bad, but spending that increases the economy (the grant program) isn't.

No one would ever make a product that is 'better than apple pie' unless it sold 'better than apple pie'.

If you lack the means of understanding the science, and thus mistrust it. You are no different then a third world nation mistrusting the first world solutions to their problems, like AIDS and malaria. Anyone who thinks that someone is only out for their best interest and not his own first, is a sucker. Anyone who distrust people because of such self-interest, is a fool. I don't expect trust of Merk, but of the evidenced science.

Facts! Pssh, you can prove anything even remotely true with facts.
- Homer Simpson

[God] is an infinite nothing from nowhere with less power over our universe than the secretary of agriculture.
- Prof. Frink

Lisa: Yes, but wouldn't you rather know the truth than to delude yourself for happiness?
Marge: Well... um.... [goes outside to jump on tampoline with Homer.]
Edited by - Neurosis on 02/24/2007 11:57:09
Go to Top of Page

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9666 Posts

Posted - 02/24/2007 :  06:26:02   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent

quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse

quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
Sigh...
I think the Merck deal is just another example of why I question what scientists have to say. We'll do it, because it is for the greater good. Then, "What, you aren't going to pay for it?"


So your gripe isn't really against scientists, but pharmaceutical companies that run their business for profits. Are you simply confusing the two?



No, it is a side (OT) gripe.
The gripe is the inability to take science at it's word. Merck is an example.

It wasn't scientists that decided to withhold the knowledge of bad side-effects of Vioxx. It was corporate employees that were concerned for the company's bottom line. They were selling a product.

quote:
It is little difirent then any other philosiphy that is "looking out for my best intrests."
What philosophy would that be? Care to name any examples?

quote:
It is corrupt, and must be looked at from that angle.

Pharmaceutical companies may be corrupt, but here's today's news: The pharmaceutical company aren't made up of 100% scientists. Far from it. Economists and CEOs are in it for the profit, they are the ones more susceptible to cutting corners.
There may be corrupt scientists too, of course. But just because there are men who are corrupted, does not mean that science as a method is corrupted.

Your gripe is misdirected.

Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 10 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.24 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000