OT: Rand Paul is an idiot

[CA renter]

Again, I do not know whether or not these families were included in any kind of database. They were both complaining about the total lack of attention, from both the medical community and the government, given to their families and others like them. They were stonewalled by almost everyone they came into contact with. Their pediatricians didn’t just refuse to treat the children for their issues, they refused to do any research into why these children reacted they way they did within 24 hours of being vaccinated, and they refused to have ANY communications with the parents when the parents brought up their concerns; the same goes for any government agencies (including politicians, though I believe they did have one who was trying to be somewhat helpful) they had contacted for help.

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=poorgradstudent][quote=scaredyclassic]Here’s some legal advice.

If you have to go to trial and choose between 2 lawyers. One who’s real good with the law, data or scientific evidence….and another one who seems a little dumber but who is a riveting storyteller…

Take the latter.[/quote]

Or hire a firm that has both, with the storyteller doing the talking in court and the brain doing research and feeding the talker notes in the courtroom.

I actually know a lawyer who is more the former, but he rarely sets foot in an actual court room.[/quote]

What I mean is if you need to persuade people, storytellers work better than technicians.

[njtosd]

[quote=CA renter]Again, I do not know whether or not these families were included in any kind of database. They were both complaining about the total lack of attention, from both the medical community and the government, given to their families and others like them. They were stonewalled by almost everyone they came into contact with. Their pediatricians didn’t just refuse to treat the children for their issues, they refused to do any research into why these children reacted they way they did within 24 hours of being vaccinated, and they refused to have ANY communications with the parents when the parents brought up their concerns; the same goes for any government agencies (including politicians, though I believe they did have one who was trying to be somewhat helpful) they had contacted for help.[/quote]

I think you get my point. And as a final one – I have a hard time seeing a conspiracy involving the vaccine manufacturers. Vaccines are not terribly profitable per dose, and the number of doses per person is, by design, about 1-3. If you wanted to fabricate data,, or cover up bad side effects, it would be vastly more profitable to do it in connection with something like allergy or pain meds that people take multiple times a day, not a few times in their lifetimes. Plus, most of the manufacturers aren’t even American companies (which is an issue in itself – but American companies are put off by the low profit/high drama nature of vaccines) so they are less susceptible to US government influence.

[dumbrenter]

Funny that those that argue that women should have control over their bodies turn around and want needles to be poked into everyone else.

This is not a science question. It is about society.
For whatever reason a person refuses to get a vaccine, does it mean that they have no right to exist? Should they be killed (Funny, for not wanting to get poked with a needle!)?

Should their right to live be revoked by the rest of the society, should they move to Montana like OP suggests? Wonder why the OP would not want to move to Alaska, away from the non-vaccinated.

Why don’t those that like to get vaccinated do that, and leave the rest alone? If you are vaccinated against measles, you would not get it anyway, right?

[zk]

[quote=dumbrenter]If you are vaccinated against measles, you would not get it anyway, right?[/quote]

No, not right. Thus voiding your point(s).

[njtosd]

[quote=zk][quote=dumbrenter]If you are vaccinated against measles, you would not get it anyway, right?[/quote]

No, not right. Thus voiding your point(s).[/quote]

Plus, even children who do get vaccinated do not reach maximum immunity until they are a few years old due to the need for multiple doses. It’s worse for premies. So zk is right “No, not right.”

[dumbrenter]

[quote=njtosd][quote=zk][quote=dumbrenter]If you are vaccinated against measles, you would not get it anyway, right?[/quote]

No, not right. Thus voiding your point(s).[/quote]

Plus, even children who do get vaccinated do not reach maximum immunity until they are a few years old due to the need for multiple doses. It’s worse for premies. So zk is right “No, not right.”[/quote]

So your kid gets vaccinated against measles, but there is still a chance to get infected with measles and to prevent that you want to get everybody around you to be poked by a needle.
By the same logic, if your neighbor’s kid is allergic to nuts, we should ban them from your neighborhood or even the whole county just to be sure. Because we don’t want kids to suffer, either from measles or allergies.

[zk]

[quote=dumbrenter]
By the same logic, if your neighbor’s kid is allergic to nuts, we should ban them from your neighborhood or even the whole county just to be sure. Because we don’t want kids to suffer, either from measles or allergies.[/quote]

That’s not the same logic.

But, to answer your question, yes, to prevent my kid (and thousands of other kids) from getting measles, I want everybody to be poked by a needle.

[Coronita]

[quote=dumbrenter]
So your kid gets vaccinated against measles, but there is still a chance to get infected with measles and to prevent that you want to get everybody around you to be poked by a needle.
By the same logic, if your neighbor’s kid is allergic to nuts, we should ban them from your neighborhood or even the whole county just to be sure. Because we don’t want kids to suffer, either from measles or allergies.[/quote]

Have you been to an elementary school in CarmelV lately?

Ever heard of “peanut free zone”?

Lunch tables designated nut-free tables and classrooms with kids that have a nut allergy have designed precautions taken, including restrictions food/etc during class/holiday events.

A woman’s right to choose has no impact on the health/well being of everyone else around them.

[dumbrenter]

[quote=flu][quote=dumbrenter]
So your kid gets vaccinated against measles, but there is still a chance to get infected with measles and to prevent that you want to get everybody around you to be poked by a needle.
By the same logic, if your neighbor’s kid is allergic to nuts, we should ban them from your neighborhood or even the whole county just to be sure. Because we don’t want kids to suffer, either from measles or allergies.[/quote]

Have you been to an elementary school in CarmelV lately?

Ever heard of “peanut free zone”?

Lunch tables designated nut-free tables and classrooms with kids that have a nut allergy have designed precautions taken, including restrictions food/etc during class/holiday events.

A woman’s right to choose has no impact on the health/well being of everyone else around them.[/quote]

Am trying to make sense of your words…. My point was that if everybody has to be forced to do something for zk’s kid to be prevented from measles, the same should apply for allergies and maybe some other items too.
Not sure what this has to do with school tables? Are you suggesting that kids who do not get vaccinated be separated from the kids who do? If not, your questions about carmelV (assuming you meant carmel valley) makes no sense and I’m not sure why you are asking me if I have ever been to elementary schools in carmelV.

A woman’s right to choose DOES have an impact on my future well-being in terms of future tax receipts and my social security payments. Let’s be honest about how the right to choose is affecting the demographics. My comparison was that while we are at poking people whether they like it or not, how about doing the same the right to choose?

[dumbrenter]

[quote=zk][quote=dumbrenter]
By the same logic, if your neighbor’s kid is allergic to nuts, we should ban them from your neighborhood or even the whole county just to be sure. Because we don’t want kids to suffer, either from measles or allergies.[/quote]

That’s not the same logic.

But, to answer your question, yes, to prevent my kid (and thousands of other kids) from getting measles, I want everybody to be poked by a needle.[/quote]

I don’t see the difference, but at least you are honest in what everybody needs to do for you.
Rand Paul gets my vote on this for sure.

[Anonymous]

[quote=dumbrenter]Am trying to make sense of your words…. [/quote]

You might want to start with making sense of your own words.

[scaredyclassic]

What about unvaccinated people bear full cost of any health problem out of pocket?

[dumbrenter]

[quote=harvey][quote=dumbrenter]Am trying to make sense of your words…. [/quote]

You might want to start with making sense of your own words.[/quote]

You the same person with two accounts?

If not, harvey, this must have really riled you up for you to take the trouble of providing such a gracious response.
I did, but still don’t make sense of “carmelV” related questions from flu (or is it harvey now).

Any other suggestions or things you want to vent about? Please do, it need not have anything to do about the point I was making BTW.

[Anonymous]

Your whole “personal freedom” angle griping about “poking people whether they like it or not” is nonsense.

I’m sorry if vaccinations are painful to you, but we aren’t forcing you to get one.

We are forcing children to get vaccinations whether or not their parents like it. We do that with a lot of things. We force children to be properly fed and get an education and basic medical care, etc. whether their parents like it or not.

It’s a well-established principle of a civilized society that we protect children from idiots, even of those idiots are the child’s parents.

And it would be wise to protect children from Rand Paul, because he’s an idiot.

[Author]

Posts