2011.03.05 Q'uo on Vaccines

[Louisabell]

https://gizmodo.com/it-took-two-months-a...37421?IR=T

Now, I don't think pushing an agenda based on a case report of one person is useful at all (on both sides) because in a population so large, these events are so statistically insignificant that it shouldn't factor into anyones decision making. That is the problem with basing conclusions on anecdotal information. We need to move beyond this way of thinking, and the pro-vax side doesn't help by continuing to foster that type of thinking.

"these events are so statistically insignificant that it shouldn't factor into anyones decision making"

("the events" being - a bad reaction to a vaccination - the reaction of the body to getting ill from the disease)

This is a "false equivalency".

Why? Because the disparity in the risks are 'rare vs common'.

Then show it is common and not rare. Not possible through a case report. You're still seeing the article through your own lens. Believe me, this story will not stand up compared to a devastating story of a vaccine injury told by bereaving parents.

You may believe the "cause and effect" mechanisms on one side supersedes the other (based on what you already know), but this article is living by the sword of appealing to people's emotions, and therefore it will also die by that sword.

Unfortunately these articles mainly serve as a way to anger people that are already pro-vax. Just look at the comment section of the article you linked and see how many people are saying medics should not have treated the child to teach the "idiot" parents a lesson. That's just sad.

(Also just to be clear, I wasn't necessarily saying that you printing that news story was fear mongering, but my main fear was that I would be disemminating fear-inducing information in order to make my case, and perhaps I did, so I am sorry about that to the people on this forum. My intention is only to offer understanding of the other side)