Vaccines are one of the only facets of modern “medicine” that has effected any positive change

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4289898&forum_id=2#38438365)

2) to your wife: OOOGA BOOGA

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4289898&forum_id=2#38438372)

"they were weak and not funny", says Wilbur Mercer at their funeral.

"not even a little bit funny"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4289898&forum_id=2#38438488)

The anti-vax community is akin to Sandy Hook Truthers. No amount of argument or evidence will ever satisfy or convince them.

Get your kids vaccinated. The risk of reaction or issue is minute. But between anti-vaxxers, illegals, and orthodox communities, your child's risk of contracting something preventable is much higher.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4289898&forum_id=2#38438659)

and i really couldn't give a shit about vaccines, has no relevance to my field. plenty of other medical flame though

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4289898&forum_id=2#38439604)

At 2, there are other communication things they can test and ask about.

Also now, you get all sorts of free social and health services diagnosed with autism so lots of parents want the diagnosis just to get free shit.

Your parents are in denial and think their kids are perfect. You should go to a doctor now and they’ll diagnose you properly.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4289898&forum_id=2#38443269)

get their shots

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4289898&forum_id=2#38440901)

121. A further reason why industrial society cannot be reformed in favor of freedom is that modern technology is a unified system in which all parts are dependent on one another. You can't get rid of the "bad" parts of technology and retain only the "good" parts. Take modern medicine, for example. Progress in medical science depends on progress in chemistry, physics, biology, computer science and other fields. Advanced medical treatments require expensive, high-tech equipment that can be made available only by a technologically progressive, economically rich society. Clearly you can't have much Progress in medicine without the whole technological system and everything that goes with it.

122. Even if medical progress could be maintained without the rest of the technological system, it would by itself bring certain evils. Suppose for example that a cure for diabetes is discovered. People with a genetic tendency to diabetes will then be able to survive and reproduce as well as anyone else. Natural selection against genes for diabetes will cease and such genes will spread throughout the population. (This may be occurring to some extent already, since diabetes, while not curable, can be controlled through use of insulin.) The same thing will happen with many other diseases susceptibility to which is affected by genetic degradation of the population. The only solution will be some sort of eugenics program or extensive genetic engineering of human beings, so that man in the future will no longer be a creation of nature, or of chance, or of God (depending on your religious or philosophical opinions), but a manufactured product.

123. If you think that big government interferes in your life too much NOW, just wait till the government starts regulating the genetic constitution of your children. Such regulation will inevitably follow the introduction of genetic engineering of human beings, because the consequences of unregulated genetic engineering would be disastrous. [19]

124. The usual response to such concerns is to talk about "medical ethics." But a code of ethics would not serve to protect freedom in the face of medical progress; it would only make matters worse. A code of ethics applicable to genetic engineering would be in effect a means of regulating the genetic constitution of human beings. Somebody (probably the upper-middle class, mostly) would decide that such and such applications of genetic engineering were "ethical". and others were not, so that in effect they would be imposing their own values on the genetic constitution of the population at large. Even if a code of ethics were chosen on a completely democratic basis, the majority would be imposing their own values on any minorities who might have a different idea of what constituted an "ethical" use of genetic engineering. The only code of ethics that would truly protect freedom would be one that prohibited ANY genetic engineering of human beings, and you can be sure that no such code will ever be applied in a technological society. No code that reduced genetic engineering to a minor role could stand up for long, because the temptation presented by the immense power of biotechnology would be irresistible, especially since to the majority of people many of its applications will seem obviously and unequivocally good (eliminating physical and mental diseases, giving people the abilities they need to get along in today's world). Inevitably, genetic engineering will be used extensively, but only in ways consistent with the needs of the industrial-technological system. [20]

19. (Paragraph 123) Just think an irresponsible genetic engineer might create a lot of terrorists.

20. (Paragraph 124) For a further example of undesirable consequences of medical progress, suppose a reliable cure for cancer is discovered. Even if the treatment is too expensive to be available to any but the elite, it will greatly reduce their incentive to stop the escape of carcinogens into the environment.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4289898&forum_id=2#38442238)

We don't have good data on adverse reactions because patients only report an estimated 1% of reactions, and doctors only have to report adverse reactions already identified by the vaccine manufacturer and generally only within 1-2 weeks of vaccine administration. After 1 month, potential adverse reactions are almost never reported, so there is no long-term data collection.

Vaccine Act basically eliminated civil liability for vaccine makers once FDA approves (treated as "unavoidably unsafe"), so no incentive to improve vaccines as more data comes in (unlike normal drugs).

Vaccine court is a complete joke with no case law/stare decisis. The vaccine injury table was supposed to cover most cases and ensure speedy compensation in exchange for Pharma immunity. Instead, HHS has failed to add newly discovered reactions and, in fact, removed many entries such that now only 2% of cases are on-table. So injured parties are stuck in admin court with very limited discovery and yet it still takes more than 5 years on average to close a case. Civil cases generally complete in less than 3, so the Act has completely failed to achieve its purpose. Pharma doesn't even pay for the vaccine court recoveries that do occur (funded by a vaccine tax that obviously does not lower demand due to insurance and mandates).

FDA approval process generally only requires 2 weeks of follow up monitoring and pharma doesn't even pay participants of the clinical trials to report later adverse events so most don't bother with all the paperwork.

Many vaccines are much less effective than advertised. For example, we were sold on herd immunity, e.g. 90% for measles. Yet, even in states with 99% vaccination, outbreaks occur. Now Pharma is pushing for multiple doses. (See also Pharma corporate filings: Vaccines are listed as highest expected future profit growth.)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4289898&forum_id=2#38442578)

Denmark has the best follow up data. But their schedule doesn't include a lot of the US vaccines (and coincidentally has 1/10th the autism rate vs US).

Keep in mind that risk/benefit analysis is generally only performed (if at all) many years later when adverse reactions are clearly shown. Even then, the estimated benefit of herd immunity can outweigh almost any individual patient's adverse reactions.

Best strategy is to strongly promote vaccines in your community while privately limiting your own kids' vaccinations. Obviously may not work in California where liberals already regularly practice "for thee, not me" (e.g. vote to require lots of vaccinations but then get private exemption, promote 4G/5G but refuse tower near house/school/office, promote GMO but buy organic, fight for busing, bilingual education, and Common Core then send kids to private school, mandatory affordable housing but live in gated community, vote for high gas tax but drive $100k Tesla...).

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4289898&forum_id=2#38443981)