Poll of the Day > Rob Schneider Attacks LIBERALS for SILENCING the ANTI-VAXX MOVEMENT!!!

(+) Yeah! (+)

56 y/o failed Actor AND Comedian, Rob Schneider has blasted technology giants and LIBERALS in a free speech rant where he said he was threatened with violence because of others pushing "totalitarian crap"

He's referring to his ANTI-VAXX stance that he's had for years and took to twittertoattack Google, Facebook and Youtube for hiding information fromusers

FB admits they have limited views of groups pushing misinformation on vaccines linked to autism and Amazon has removed books that claim to promote cures for those in the specturm

Rob said "Sorry to have to repeat this again: Free Speech is ALL speech. Even the speech that you find repugnant. You are either for ALL of it or..you are for none of it.We don't need people deciding FOR us what to think, see or hear. That's a load of totalitarian crap."

The Deuce Bigalow star who has 3 daughters aged 30, 7 and 3 expressed his worries of lack of free flowing ideas, good and bad and said "People can decide for themselves what ideas belong in the dustbin of history. Silencing those we disagree with denies us the chance to question our preconceived notions. Either to reaffirm them or reassess them. Our ideas needand should always be consistently challenged and reconsidered so we don't merely end up as a consensus gorup think"

Then he turned his attack against Liberals when Sen. Richard Pan signed a law to reverse a law where parents medical exemption for vaccines was no longer allowed and they weree kicked ou to fschool because of their opposition to compulsory vaccines and claimed if illegal immigration is protected by sanctuary status so can the rights of parents.

He is now donating 10K to New York children who have been kicked out of public schools by the "cruel Gov and New York Legislatures" and urged them to go HOME SHCOOLING and that medical segregation was coming.

He blasted the "fake news liberal media" who would not tell the truth of vaccines and urged students to WALK OUT of schools to protest these vaccines and called California Governor Newsom a "coward" who caters to the #MeToo Movement

Rob said America is going to have a war over free speech like IRAN as he shared footage of tear gas canistersaimed at petrol protesters..

This comes after he attacked the "left's ignorannce of Stalin's tyrrany" and said California would vote for a bowl of s*** if it had a D next to it

Do you support the Anti-Vaxx Kooks movement?

Rob - Failed Activist and Actor

https://i.imgur.com/LqzDUBo.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/Q7fmGzm.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/yVZj07N.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/hwycVNK.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/fhfRv7y.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/lKEoqD1.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/hT055JY.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/CDtzcTc.jpg
---

I didnt like him near as much before.

---

https://youtu.be/MvDCPvQuidA

---

You guys already know what I think on the subject.

Just going to say... why are certain types and even brands of vaccines outlawed in other countries but are okay in the states?
---

I support "teh fre spech", and anti-vaxxers murdering babies is an unfortunate consequence of that.

I tell them they're dumb, but, like, it's their choice to be murderers.
---

I thought liberals, like Jenny McCarthy, were the ones pushing the movement
---

Muscles posted...

I thought liberals, like Jenny McCarthy, were the ones pushing the movement

I figured both sides had types of people among them that would be anti vaxx. Religious (anti science) on one side and big corporations are evil (big pharma being just that) on the other. Never cared to look into it to see if that was the case though.
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

Muscles posted...

I thought liberals, like Jenny McCarthy, were the ones pushing the movement

I figured both sides had types of people among them that would be anti vaxx. Religious (anti science) on one side and big corporations are evil (big pharma being just that) on the other. Never cared to look into it to see if that was the case though.

What you need to know is that thousands of parents report having a baby with excellent eye contact, name response/recognition, and very social... then immediately after getting their vaccine for Measles/Mump/Rubella their kid loses eye contact, name response, etc.

That isnt being denied by the medical industry... instead they want us to believe that because autism causes regression, that coincidentally their first regression began after they received their shots but thats just a coincidence.
---

Why would anti-vaxx be the stance to pivot on to defend free speech? Anti-vaxx has literally gotten people killed but I don't remember him defending people's right to not agree with Feminism or some shit.
---

HornedLion posted...

What you need to know is that thousands of parents report having a baby with excellent eye contact, name response/recognition, and very social... then immediately after getting their vaccine for Measles/Mump/Rubella their kid loses eye contact, name response, etc.

Thousands of parents have falsified positive memories of their babies they're (rightly) obsessed with.
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

HornedLion posted...

What you need to know is that thousands of parents report having a baby with excellent eye contact, name response/recognition, and very social... then immediately after getting their vaccine for Measles/Mump/Rubella their kid loses eye contact, name response, etc.

Thousands of parents have falsified positive memories of their babies they're (rightly) obsessed with.

Theres videos of before and after that parents have posted online. Theyre hard to watch too.

Fun fact: My little girl is getting some shots today. DTaP, Hep B, and I think something else.
---

Lets not pretend that anyone gives a shit what Rob Schneider has to say

---

HornedLion posted...

Theres videos of before and after that parents have posted online. Theyre hard to watch too.

Videos of babies, then videos of them feeling ill from their immune systems having to work out a bit?
---

Unfortunately the anti-vaxxers' parents had the foresight to vaccinate, so we're kinda stuck with these kooks.
---

Are people really dumb enough to believe that unvaccinated kids are guaranteed death? I think they've taken too many memes at face value. You could not get vaccinated in first world countries and the odds of you ever getting one of those diseases would be extremely slim

Kyuubi4269 posted...

HornedLion posted...

Theres videos of before and after that parents have posted online. Theyre hard to watch too.

Videos of babies, then videos of them feeling ill from their immune systems having to work out a bit?

https://youtu.be/SccZrtOF5QM

The MMR vaccine works in preventing Measles, Mumps, and Rubella; diseases that can be devastating and even deadly.

Gasoline works great at getting me to and from work.

The problem I have with them isnt the effectiveness of their intended purpose but the side effects. With the vaccines theres vaccine injury, and with Gas theres pollution and increased carbon dioxide.

Both the vaccine and gasoline are miracles and triumphs of humanities intelligence but... where the problem comes in is that they arent and shouldnt be the end. They are but the beginning of journey. We shouldnt be reliant on fossil fuels forever due to their adverse side effects, and in that same way we shouldnt be reliant on the primative vaccines. We should innovate to reduce or completely eliminate negative effects. But instead what weve gotten is both industries using their money to buy influence and sway public opinion rather than perfect their product, which lets be honest is going to be very expensive. But its also the right thing to do.
---

HornedLion posted...

The MMR vaccine works in preventing Measles, Mumps, and Rubella; diseases that can be devastating and even deadly.

Gasoline works great at getting me to and from work.

The problem I have with them isnt the effectiveness of their intended purpose but the side effects. With the vaccines theres vaccine injury, and with Gas theres pollution and increased carbon dioxide.

Both the vaccine and gasoline are miracles and triumphs of humanities intelligence but... where the problem comes in is that they arent and shouldnt be the end. They are but the beginning of journey. We shouldnt be reliant on fossil fuels forever due to their adverse side effects, and in that same way we shouldnt be reliant on the primative vaccines. We should innovate to reduce or completely eliminate negative effects. But instead what weve gotten is both industries using their money to buy influence and sway public opinion rather than perfect their product, which lets be honest is going to be very expensive. But its also the right thing to do.

No shit? But going anti-vaxx is like switching from gasoline to chocolate milk to run your car because they both have energy.
---

HornedLion posted...

You guys already know what I think on the subject.

Last time we talked about this, I remember you suggesting that the best course of action was to delay the vaccine schedule by a year or so to deliver them at a less developmentally sensitive time and reduce the supposed risk of developing autism. In response, I challenged you to find data on autism rates between the many children that already follow a modified vaccine schedule (for any number of reasons) and those that follow a normal one, since your hypothesis was an easy one to test. Unfortunately, I never made it back to that topic, so I don't actually know: did you ever rise to that challenge?

OhhhJa posted...

Are people really dumb enough to believe that unvaccinated kids are guaranteed death? I think they've taken too many memes at face value. You could not get vaccinated in first world countries and the odds of you ever getting one of those diseases would be extremely slim

Obviously it's not a guaranteed death, but as vaccination rates drop, the risk of encountering these diseases absolutely does increase to significant levels. There are measles outbreaks ongoing as we speak, which isn't something that should be happening in a country with MMR vaccines so readily available. None of us or our children are particularly likely to die from these diseases in the current situation, no, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be vociferously objecting to people increasing that risk by being stupid.
---

adjl posted...

HornedLion posted...

You guys already know what I think on the subject.

Last time we talked about this, I remember you suggesting that the best course of action was to delay the vaccine schedule by a year or so to deliver them at a less developmentally sensitive time and reduce the supposed risk of developing autism. In response, I challenged you to find data on autism rates between the many children that already follow a modified vaccine schedule (for any number of reasons) and those that follow a normal one, since your hypothesis was an easy one to test. Unfortunately, I never made it back to that topic, so I don't actually know: did you ever rise to that challenge?

No harm as I didnt see that either. But I can answer it now.

A while back it was presented that among a group vaccinated children within the first 3 years of life the Autism rate was 8%(give or take, was a while ago) but for the group vaccinated post 3 years old it was less than 1%(again give or take). The belief being that those who got vaccinated after 3 and were autistic it was because they were actually born autistic and not due to vaccine injury.
---

OhhhJa posted...

Are people really dumb enough to believe that unvaccinated kids are guaranteed death? I think they've taken too many memes at face value. You could not get vaccinated in first world countries and the odds of you ever getting one of those diseases would be extremely slim

I dont think theyre guaranteed death. Though, I think it does raise the risk a little.

Also, for the last point, isnt that mostly because of herd immunity?
---

HornedLion posted...

A while back it was presented that among a group vaccinated children within the first 3 years of life the Autism rate was 8%(give or take, was a while ago) but for the group vaccinated post 3 years old it was less than 1%(again give or take). The belief being that those who got vaccinated after 3 and were autistic it was because they were actually born autistic and not due to vaccine injury.

Considering how the rate is about 1% in the UK for anything on the spectrum, a country that does several vaccinations before the first year, I'm going to call bullshit on that.
---

You've seen him as an animal then a stapler. Now he's an...Anti vaxxer
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

HornedLion posted...

A while back it was presented that among a group vaccinated children within the first 3 years of life the Autism rate was 8%(give or take, was a while ago) but for the group vaccinated post 3 years old it was less than 1%(again give or take). The belief being that those who got vaccinated after 3 and were autistic it was because they were actually born autistic and not due to vaccine injury.

Considering how the rate is about 1% in the UK for anything on the spectrum, a country that does several vaccinations before the first year, I'm going to call bullshit on that.

The CDC's most recent data for the US (2014) says 1.7%, so yeah, I'm gonna need to see a citation on that.
---

He doesnt own facebook or Twitter right?

Free speech is a thing, but not when you have to use someone elses platform to do it.

---

Muscles posted...

I thought liberals, like Jenny McCarthy, were the ones pushing the movement

Liberals like Trump.

adjl posted...

Kyuubi4269 posted...

HornedLion posted...

A while back it was presented that among a group vaccinated children within the first 3 years of life the Autism rate was 8%(give or take, was a while ago) but for the group vaccinated post 3 years old it was less than 1%(again give or take). The belief being that those who got vaccinated after 3 and were autistic it was because they were actually born autistic and not due to vaccine injury.

Considering how the rate is about 1% in the UK for anything on the spectrum, a country that does several vaccinations before the first year, I'm going to call bullshit on that.

The CDC's most recent data for the US (2014) says 1.7%, so yeah, I'm gonna need to see a citation on that.

Again, in my comment I stated that I didnt remember exactly the percentage. It was before I cared about the subject so I didnt retain it as well as I would today. But I do remember the fact that there was a significant reduction in autism rates for children being vaccinated after age 3.

Now, since you seem to have dug your heels into your position, Id like to comment... are you saying that EVERY. SINGLE. PROCEDURE in the world has risks involved and yet vaccines are purely magical with no risks whatsoever?

Getting teeth pulled? Sign this form stating the risks.
Tonsils removed? Sign this form stating the risks.
Getting a vaccination? Oh no, youre good. These things have no adverse effects.

You guys go hard as if the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program isnt a thing. As if as of October 2019, $4.2 Billion in compensation hasnt been paid out since it started. And thats not including lawyers and legal fees.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services set up the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) in 1988 to compensate individuals and families of individuals injured by covered childhood vaccines.

Do you...
A) Just not know enough about the topic
B) Go with whatever the media says regardless of anything
C) Are afraid to receive the harsh criticism that those who question vaccines are receiving?

The best stance Ive seen people take against anti-Vaxxers is that of, Yeah but I rather take the ASD risk over the possible death risk.

But the Vaccines are perfectly safe and dont cause autism because big pharma funded a study stance is just not sustainable given all we know.
---

Delicinq4 posted...

He's dumb but liberals do tend to try to silence things they oppose instead of freely debate them.

Silencing dangerous misinformation is not really the same as silencing an opinion.

HornedLion posted...

mooreandrew58 posted...

Muscles posted...

I thought liberals, like Jenny McCarthy, were the ones pushing the movement

I figured both sides had types of people among them that would be anti vaxx. Religious (anti science) on one side and big corporations are evil (big pharma being just that) on the other. Never cared to look into it to see if that was the case though.

What you need to know is that thousands of parents report having a baby with excellent eye contact, name response/recognition, and very social... then immediately after getting their vaccine for Measles/Mump/Rubella their kid loses eye contact, name response, etc.

That isnt being denied by the medical industry... instead they want us to believe that because autism causes regression, that coincidentally their first regression began after they received their shots but thats just a coincidence.

This has been repeatedly disproven but ok.
---

HornedLion posted...

Again, in my comment I stated that I didnt remember exactly the percentage. It was before I cared about the subject so I didnt retain it as well as I would today. But I do remember the fact that there was a significant reduction in autism rates for children being vaccinated after age 3.

If you can't cite your source, I have no reason to believe what you're saying. Again, your hypothesis is a very easily tested one. Get out there and do some research. If it's worth believing in, you'll be able to support it empirically.

HornedLion posted...

ow, since you seem to have dug your heels into your position, Id like to comment... are you saying that EVERY. SINGLE. PROCEDURE in the world has risks involved and yet vaccines are purely magical with no risks whatsoever?

Of course not, and you've seen me say this several times before. Of course vaccines have risks. As you say, every medical procedure does. The position is not that vaccines are perfectly safe, it's that vaccines are light years safer than the diseases they protect against.

I also don't know why you're equivocating "vaccines don't cause autism" with "vaccines have no risks." ASD is not the only potential side effect a vaccine could have, nor would it be the most significant even if it were actually a side effect.

There is also no reason to believe that vaccines cause autism because the only study to ever find that link was always garbage science (n=12, which is meaningless), even before it was proven that the guy who published it knowingly falsified the entire thing because he was being paid by lawyers representing some parents who were trying to sue a pharmaceutical company. This is not "big pharma funded a study to prove vaccines don't cause autism," because that is logically impossible (can't prove a negative). This is "there was never any concrete reason to believe this in the first place."

And no, your dentist only noticing developmental issues after their kid was vaccinated is not a concrete reason to believe it. Subjective anecdotes are not concrete evidence, especially when they're as emotionally charged as that would have been. You need actual statistics and medical records for a large number of people in order to even identify a genuine correlation, let alone start inferring a casual relationship from it.
---

HornedLion posted...

Getting a vaccination? Oh no, youre good. These things have no adverse effects.

What? Obviously getting a vaccine has risks. If the nurse/doctor/whoever isn't careful yes they can injure you. Or maybe your body actually gets the flu from the vaccine. But these things aren't at all common. It's just it's been proven to not have the risk of causing autism, since autism develops before birth. There is 0 evidence of a link between autism and vaccination.
---

papercup posted...

HornedLion posted...

Getting a vaccination? Oh no, youre good. These things have no adverse effects.

What? Obviously getting a vaccine has risks. If the nurse/doctor/whoever isn't careful yes they can injure you. Or maybe your body actually gets the flu from the vaccine. But these things aren't at all common. It's just it's been proven to not have the risk of causing autism, since autism develops before birth. There is 0 evidence of a link between autism and vaccination.

You cannot get the flu from the flu vaccine. Its a dead virus making what you are saying a physical impossibility.
---

HornedLion posted...

Again, in my comment I stated that I didnt remember exactly the percentage. It was before I cared about the subject so I didnt retain it as well as I would today. But I do remember the fact that there was a significant reduction in autism rates for children being vaccinated after age 3.

You only remember a dubious fact, not your dubious sources because that's what's useful to your cause.

HornedLion posted...

Now, since you seem to have dug your heels into your position, Id like to comment... are you saying that EVERY. SINGLE. PROCEDURE in the world has risks involved and yet vaccines are purely magical with no risks whatsoever?

Getting teeth pulled? Sign this form stating the risks.
Tonsils removed? Sign this form stating the risks.
Getting a vaccination? Oh no, youre good. These things have no adverse effects.

I don't sign a form for aspirin despite adverse effects. You sign for protection against suing the practitioner for malpractice. You could sue if a vaccinator fucked up the injection, you can't sue because the vaccination isn't working how you like.

Collat posted...

Silencing dangerous misinformation is not really the same as silencing an opinion.

It absolutely is as you challenge either to defeat its credibility. If you ignore misinformation, you allow it to claim legitimacy from being unchallenged factually.
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

It absolutely is as you challenge either to defeat its credibility. If you ignore misinformation, you allow it to claim legitimacy from being unchallenged factually.

Anti-vax misinformation has already been thoroughly debunked with facts. There's no reason to worry about that. Giving it a platform alongside those facts would do far more to legitimize it than a couple of conspiratorial nutjobs whining about their freedom of speech are ever going to be able to do.
---

adjl posted...

Anti-vax misinformation has already been thoroughly debunked with facts. There's no reason to worry about that.

That's not how propaganda works. The wage gap has been debunked numerous different ways and yet we still see new recruits parroting the statement.

You can drill false ideas in to people's heads with pure saturation so the only defense is persistent fact-based detergent.
---

I don't support anti-vax, but I support his right to ignorance.

papercup posted...

HornedLion posted...

Getting a vaccination? Oh no, youre good. These things have no adverse effects.

What? Obviously getting a vaccine has risks. If the nurse/doctor/whoever isn't careful yes they can injure you. Or maybe your body actually gets the flu from the vaccine. But these things aren't at all common. It's just it's been proven to not have the risk of causing autism, since autism develops before birth. There is 0 evidence of a link between autism and vaccination.

Papercut, there is no genetic test for autism. Theres no blood test, cat scan, etc., that can be done to conclusively say you have it.

Instead a developmental pediatrician will observe a patient, and perform numerous tests. I remember my son saw one once, and the doctor began to blow bubbles. And then he suddenly stopped. My son stood there looking at him like, Okay continue. And the doctor explained to me that that was good. Someone on the spectrum wouldve just walked away.

So since this is how its tested, no one can say that it begins at birth. No way to scientifically prove it. And even at ages 1-3 its hard to diagnose because a lot of the quirky things toddlers do overlap with ASD symptoms.

So, to my point, a child exhibits excellent eye contact, speech, name response... all things incompatible with ASD and then they lose it all after their vaccination. Thats a clear cause and effect.

And the medical community doesnt say what my friends Kyuubi4269 & adjl say that its parents lying but instead they say its a coincidence. Theyre not denying it happened... theyre denying that it was due to the vaccine.

The ultra corporate democrat, Bill Maher, had a discussion about this recently on his show with Dr. Jay Gordon. In it Dr. Jay Gordon recounts speaking with a colleague in the parking lot after being on a show together. He asked him if he really believed that vaccines had no effect in ASD rates. And he admitted that he believes they do but its not something you can say on TV. Bill Maher even acknowledge that the story of kids not being on the spectrum, getting vaccinated and then within 72hrs demonstrating textbook ASD symptoms is one that keeps coming up.

Ironically, Im at the doctors office now getting my daughter vaccinated. I know the risks and this is what I decided. Rest assured that I will be keeping a close eye on her. Although the ones shes getting today arent the controversial ones people attribute ASD to.

People can believe what they want. But since we ourselves were toddlers were began to learn cause-and-effect. Not a hard concept.

Is it that preposterous to think that a child under the age of 1 cannot have honey, pure... organic... natural honey(that gets filtered through the digestive system) because their body cannot handle it and possible bacteria that weve all been exposed to and inhabit us... but its okay for them to take a bunch of chemicals directly into the bloodstream with no ill effect?
---

Anti-vaxxers need to fuck off already.
---

From what I've noticed, "anti vaxxers" arent usually completely anti vaccine. They usually just question the narrative that there is no risk whatsoever despite there being numerous examples of negative effects. Not all vaccines are created equal so to speak

If most of America is vaccinated (lets say 290 million) then why aren't more people autistic?
---

OhhhJa posted...

From what I've noticed, "anti vaxxers" arent usually completely anti vaccine. They usually just question the narrative that there is no risk whatsoever despite there being numerous examples of negative effects. Not all vaccines are created equal so to speak

Sure. But thats still weird. Enough people know vaccines arent completely safe, just like every other medical procedure...
---

LinkPizza posted...

OhhhJa posted...

From what I've noticed, "anti vaxxers" arent usually completely anti vaccine. They usually just question the narrative that there is no risk whatsoever despite there being numerous examples of negative effects. Not all vaccines are created equal so to speak

Sure. But thats still weird. Enough people know vaccines arent completely safe, just like every other medical procedure...

It actually really doesnt seem that way to me. Most people seem completely unaware or are completely dismissive and smug whenever negative effects are brought up. I wouldnt be surprised if a sizable chunk of the population was for forced inoculations

Muscles posted...

If most of America is vaccinated (lets say 290 million) then why aren't more people autistic?

There's no substantial evidence to back up the autism debate which is why I think a lot of the most vocal anti anti vaxxers people go straight for that. There are many cases of negative effects that have nothing to do with autism

Rob Schneider makes Paulie Shore look like Leonardo Dicaprio.

HornedLion posted...

So, to my point, a child exhibits excellent eye contact, speech, name response... all things incompatible with ASD and then they lose it all after their vaccination. Thats a clear cause and effect.

No, that's a clear correlation (provided it is actually that clear, which is very difficult when you're dealing with subjective assessments performed in hindsight). Correlations are not causal relationships. They can be reason to investigate further to identify a causal relationship, but you cannot presume cause and effect with just a correlation. Look up the Bradford Hill Criteria if you want to learn more about the distinction and how it's applied to matters of public health.

HornedLion posted...

Is it that preposterous to think that a child under the age of 1 cannot have honey, pure... organic... natural honey(that gets filtered through the digestive system) because their body cannot handle it and possible bacteria that weve all been exposed to and inhabit us... but its okay for them to take a bunch of chemicals directly into the bloodstream with no ill effect?

All honey - however natural or organic - contains a known quantity of C. botulinum spores (that is, the dormant form of the bacterium that causes botulism). That concentration is too low to be dangerous to adults, but high enough to be dangerous to the undeveloped infant immune system. Filtering it through the digestive system has nothing to do with that, nor does it being "pure" or "natural." Ingesting a quantity of botulinum spores that is more than your immune system can handle will make you very, very sick. Why you're comparing something that has been conclusively found to be a serious risk with a well-documented and understood mechanism to something as vague as "a bunch of chemicals" with no identified mechanism of harmful action, I really don't know.

Also, most vaccines are delivered intramuscularly, not "directly into the bloodstream." Off-hand, I can't think of any intravenous vaccines. If you want to be taken seriously, you should probably try to get your facts straight and avoid jumping into transparent, melodramatic emotional appeals like that.
---

adjl posted...

Also, most vaccines are delivered intramuscularly, not "directly into the bloodstream." Off-hand, I can't think of any intravenous vaccines. If you want to be taken seriously, you should probably try to get your facts straight and avoid jumping into transparent, melodramatic emotional appeals like that.

Nitpicking details such as this, when the message was clear that the digestive system is a natural process VS not a natural process, is something that makes one not take you seriously.

Especially when you continuously bring up supposed emotions of both the parents of these children and even my own.

Ive seen no mention or response to my statement about The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). Guess thats not as easy to tackle as a intravenous VS intramuscular. At this rate the discussion has de-evolved, and I await your next message where you correct my grammar and end it with, Why you mad, bro?
---

HornedLion posted...

Nitpicking details such as this, when the message was clear that the digestive system is a natural process VS not a natural process, is something that makes one not take you seriously.

Except I spent a solid paragraph prior to that explaining why the whole "natural process" thing was irrelevant. It doesn't matter how naturally you take botulinum into your body. The harm you suffer is going to be proportional to the dose, which is true for literally every toxin. Exposure route also plays a role, but that varies from toxin to toxin and "natural" routes (a meaningless distinction because virtually every exposure route occurs in nature) are not inherently any safer than "unnatural" ones.

My point with that addendum was that that that comment from you was very transparently melodramatic fearmongering. You write a phrase like "taking an bunch of chemicals directly into the bloodstream," and people are going to imagine you clutching your pearls while you say it and dismiss your concerns accordingly. Pathos like that has no place in a discussion of public health, nor does the naturalistic fallacy (protip: botulinum toxin is among the most potently toxic substances known to mankind and is also completely natural).

HornedLion posted...

Ive seen no mention or response to my statement about The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP).

Why would I need to respond directly to that? I've said on multiple occasions (including this topic) that you're grossly misrepresenting my position if you believe that I don't think vaccines have any side effects whatsoever. The mere existence of a vaccine injury compensation program does nothing to affect my position.

HornedLion posted...

Look, it seems like Robert De Niro is another one of those emotional parents.

So it would seem, yes. Having a child diagnosed with a developmental disorder is distressing. When distressing things happen, people start to look for explanations because "it just happened for no reason" is a lot harder to accept than being able to pin the blame on something. So along comes this one study that suggests that maybe vaccines cause autism. He doesn't necessarily say "that's definitely true," but he starts thinking about how his kid was doing before and after being vaccinated. Memories being subjective and highly prone to external biases, that process is likely to result in overestimating the post-vaccination symptoms and ignoring pre-vaccination ones.

Is he hysterical? No. Does that mean his recollection of his son's developmental progress is infallible? Also no.

HornedLion posted...

How can his knowledge of his son before and after the MMR vaccine be trusted when hes sooooo emotional?

It can't, unless he's been empirically documenting all relevant details. Subjective, anecdotal assessments like that aren't credible, especially when emotional distress comes into play. It's just too easy for people to make errors in forming them. You need empirical, statistical data to identify a genuine correlation, and even then that's only a correlation and not a conclusive causal link. Anecdotes can inspire that investigation, but they should not be treated as being more credible than investigations that have already taken place and failed to support them.
---

adjl posted...

Memories being subjective and highly prone to external biases, that process is likely to result in overestimating the post-vaccination symptoms and ignoring pre-vaccination ones.

https://youtu.be/mYTW6FgqnPA
---

adjl posted...

Why would I need to respond directly to that? I've said on multiple occasions (including this topic) that you're grossly misrepresenting my position if you believe that I don't think vaccines have any side effects whatsoever. The mere existence of a vaccine injury compensation program does nothing to affect my position.

Then what are you going on about then? We both agree on the effectiveness of vaccines. It seems you would obviously vaccinate your children, and just yesterday my daughter received the DTaP, HIB, polio vaccines. And you just said that you dont believe vaccines dont have side effects, and you know I believe they definitely can and sometimes do.

I think the disconnection is the one that perhaps you dont like the negative side effects overshadowing the positives. But both are facts nonetheless.

I hope you know that anecdotal evidence is still evidence.

Subjective, anecdotal assessments like that aren't credible, especially when emotional distress comes into play. It's just too easy for people to make errors in forming them.

You understand that for you to be correct it would mean that ALL those parents recollection had to ALL been wrong. And that they all unanimously misrepresented what happened. With no exception. None were rational nor able to think rationally because of emotions. Think about it... youre smarter than that. It would also mean youd have to dismiss the before and after videos of those same children. This includes things like never having a seizure but suddenly having their first seizure within hours of being vaccinated.

My stance is that it seems certain families have a genetic disposition for the virus, and things within the environment trigger it. I have vaccinated my children and they are fine, and will continue. For us it seems the risks of not vaccinating seem to be greater than vaccinating. BUT... I wouldnt dare say that since it worked for us that it will work out exactly the same for everyone else. Especially with all we know. And I wouldnt criticize or demean them if they want to wait a bit before vaccinating. And that goes double if they already have a child and report them changing right after their vaccination.
---

HornedLion posted...

Then what are you going on about then?

That there is no substantiated link between vaccines and autism. I've never suggested anything more than that, aside from saying that the risks of vaccines are far outweighed by the benefits (which we agree on).

HornedLion posted...

I hope you know that anecdotal evidence is still evidence.

Evidence that should be used only when it's the best you've got, because it's significantly less credible than anything more empirical. Actual epidemiological studies - with concrete data - have failed to reveal a link between vaccines and autism, despite countless attempts since Wakefield's fraudulent study was published in 1998. That means nobody should be deferring to subjective anecdotal assessments that were conducted in hindsight. Those are substantially less credible than actual studies.

HornedLion posted...

You understand that for you to be correct it would mean that ALL those parents recollection had to ALL been wrong. And that they all unanimously misrepresented what happened. With no exception.

Yes. It is significantly more plausible that a couple thousand people (if that) made a retrospective subjective assessment inaccurately than that they actually observed a definite correlation that empirical studies have failed to find. Especially considering the emotional distress of the diagnosis and the fact that they had been primed to suspect the vaccine by the ongoing controversy. Especially also considering that parents will tend to be extra vigilant about any oddities in their child's health after the vaccine because of the flu-like symptoms that tend to follow any vaccine, meaning there's a good chance they'll notice something wrong that they hadn't noticed before.

HornedLion posted...

This includes things like never having a seizure but suddenly having their first seizure within hours of being vaccinated.

Yes, seizures are included in the list of potential adverse vaccine reactions, which makes a lot of sense to anyone that knows that febrile seizures are a thing. Not sure what seizures are supposed to have to do with autism, though.

HornedLion posted...

My stance is that it seems certain families have a genetic disposition for the virus, and things within the environment trigger it.

"The virus" being the inactivated virus in the vaccine? Were that the case, the actual disease would also cause autism, making it a pretty moot point. That would also likely have been picked up in one or more of the studies that have searched for a link. I don't think there's much to that theory.
---