General Discussion

jehop61

(1,735 posts)

6. Your reasoning is false

Sun Feb 8, 2015, 12:18 PM

Feb 2015

You can't base it on a ten year timeline. Measles was thought to be eradicated during that time. Go back 40 or 50 yearswhen it was rampant. A friend contacted measles 40 years ago from her children. She was in the early stages of a pregnancy. Her child was born deaf and profoundly mentally disabled and is still being cared for in a state institution.

No ine is talking today about measles' effect on pregnancy. Vaccinate your children!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

40 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Post removed [View all] Post removed Feb 2015 OP

The enormous fucking hole in that analysis: Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #1

I'm talking about the present. If the numbers change, so do the costs and benefits. Obviously. DanTex Feb 2015 #2

There was a measles outbreak in 1989-91 that infected 55k and killed 123. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #3

Anectodal evidence, huh. Yes, I'm assuming that event was covered by that study which DanTex Feb 2015 #5

We lived in a society where "most" people were vaccinated, presumably, in 1989. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #7

I don't think you understand what an "individual decision" is. DanTex Feb 2015 #12

The consequences of your "individual decision" can onecaliberal Feb 2015 #22

The overall historical fatality rate... Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #32

There are other holes as well Major Nikon Feb 2015 #14

The argument doesn't rely on 1950s data for anything except for DanTex Feb 2015 #18

Using data post 2000 would make even less sense Major Nikon Feb 2015 #36

Well, we live in 2015, so there's that... DanTex Feb 2015 #39

so do we live in a ME society... handmade34 Feb 2015 #4

You are right about that. Not vaccinating is a selfish act. But it is not an irrational one. DanTex Feb 2015 #9

Your reasoning is false jehop61 Feb 2015 #6

50 years ago, the risk of contracting measles was far higher than it was today. DanTex Feb 2015 #11

redo your math, marym625 Feb 2015 #8

What part? Mortality rate is mortality rate. DanTex Feb 2015 #10

baloney marym625 Feb 2015 #17

That's a societal argument, not an individual one. DanTex Feb 2015 #19

If the vaccination rates drop marym625 Feb 2015 #25

Yes, and if vaccination rates drop and measles rates go up, then at some point DanTex Feb 2015 #38

"That's a societal argument, not an individual one" OMFG shoot me up the ass right now, sibelian Feb 2015 #28

I'm not sure what you mean. Do you not understand the distinction between a societal DanTex Feb 2015 #34

Thank you! marym625 Feb 2015 #35

Not only is it irrational, it's plain stupid. Dr Hobbitstein Feb 2015 #13

Fair enough, but is there anything wrong with the math or the argument in the OP? DanTex Feb 2015 #15

Anti-anti-vax? Isn't that what the anti-vaxxers say to try and smear Dr Hobbitstein Feb 2015 #21

+1 marym625 Feb 2015 #27

Your "math" specifically avoids asking the relevant questions. sibelian Feb 2015 #37

What relevant questions? And can we do this without the personal attacks? DanTex Feb 2015 #40

Wow. Let's look at some materials from Europe for comparison... Bluenorthwest Feb 2015 #16

If you live in a country with highe measles rates the cost-benefit analysis will change. Obviously. DanTex Feb 2015 #23

145,000 deaths EVERY YEAR from measles -- and that's at current vaccination levels mainer Feb 2015 #20

That's worldwide, not in the US. I'm talking about the cost-benefit analysis for an individual in DanTex Feb 2015 #26

Yes, it is really irrational to skip the MMR vaccine. 99Forever Feb 2015 #24

Fair enough, just curious if there is any statistical or logical argument behind that sentiment. DanTex Feb 2015 #29

I generally don't argue with stupid. 99Forever Feb 2015 #33

+1 marym625 Feb 2015 #31

Wow, you just made the same debunked argument EVERY anti-Vaxxer makes. MohRokTah Feb 2015 #30