03-10-2019, 10:50 AM
(03-10-2019, 09:57 AM)Relaxo Wrote:(03-10-2019, 08:17 AM)Louisabell Wrote:(03-10-2019, 04:31 AM)Relaxo Wrote:(03-10-2019, 03:41 AM)Louisabell Wrote:(03-09-2019, 04:13 AM)Relaxo Wrote: 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, but if you live by the sword of appealing to one's emotions, you 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)
show that diseases are "common" ? is this what you mean?
show that pre vaccine contagious, deadly diseases used to be common place?
30 years ago I had a flatmate with one withered and shortened leg from contracting polio...
she was 25... meeting a person with polio was very rare at that time as it was already heading toward being eradicated....
as a child - like millions of children - I had a vaccination for smallpox - it's now been eradicated... *you're welcome*
I feel quite unemotional atm about this (in terms of posting that article) and only did because I happened upon it a few days ago around the time this thread was revived
I'm not up for arguing
it's an article describing the FACTS of that situation... how can it avoid the 'fear-mongering' label? it'd have to remove the plain facts of what occurred... which would turn it into a blank page...
seeing it through my "own lens" ? what? what "lens" is that ? it's the facts of a situation... is there a way to view what's described in the article through any other "lens" than that it was preventable and awful for that child to endure such illness... and parents incur such debt?
there's an additional irony that many anti-vax parents insist their school be nut free... but are fine with subjecting imuno compromised children to possibly contagious diseases via their allergic un vaxxed child....
I've worked with children with autism so find the anti-autism phobia aspect of anti-vaxxers rhetoric really derogatory.... as many marvellous people are on the spectrum.
As an autism childcare worker (at one time) at a time when vaccines were (supposedly) safer... I knew as many children then - as now - but I worked in a residential institution because parents shunned their children - this isn't done so much any more so it's more 'visible'... and the spectrum has become more clearly diagnosed in the last 10-20 years... it's always been around - and as said earlier the gastroenterologist Andrew Wakefield, making the original claim made a major mistake and then doubled down...
the main thing I find sad is that the fear of a vaccine reaction is occluding sensible fear of serious and potentially lethal illnesses
you write:
"Believe me, this story will not stand up compared to a devastating story of a vaccine injury told by bereaving parents."
aaaah - well if this child hadn't survived tetanus.... it would... is that what it takes?
and there are bereaved parents in third world countries losing children to vaccine preventable diseases as I type this...
these parents have a completely different perspective on vaccines because they aren't insulated by privileged first world living in a bubble/slight risk/vague fears made in error by a now de-registered MD
it's like - I used to really piss off my parents with my naivety about about food poverty... they were so grateful to have ANYTHING on their plates... I was fed quality and interesting food and became fussy... it was very hard for them to relate to my attitude - and me to them - they knew hunger - I never did...
and now I have my own version of it - I'm old enough to see people half my age moaning about (what ever mind blowing new technology is loading slightly too slowly :exclamation: ) when my father had holes in his shoes clothes and walked everywhere and has only one photo of himself as a child - and my entire childhood was a black and white television - 4 channels....and a phone connected to a wall with everyone listening in... and younger people will have their own experiences as they live longer - get older and younger people can't relate
people in Africa walk for days to receive vaccinations to avoid their children dying....
it's all perception...
I get worried about getting in the ocean and being eaten by a shark - but without any worry (or not much) drive on roads with speeding a******* - even though I've worked in neurosurgery wards with paraplegic accident survivors....
:exclamation: :idea:
(nb: I'm not saying all vaccines are completely risk free...)
I know it's frustrating, but yes, to find common ground it is helpful to first put on the lens of someone who doesn't know what you know, and actually thinks quite opposite to you.
(03-10-2019, 09:57 AM)Relaxo Wrote: I'm not up for arguing
I don't particularly want to argue any further on this either, especially since I think the benefits of vaccines outweigh the risks.