General Discussion

MohRokTah

(15,429 posts)

47. I ignore the anti-Vaxxers.

Reply to marym625 (Reply #46)

Sun Feb 8, 2015, 08:25 PM

Feb 2015

There is no reasoning with them.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

92 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Vaccination is a process with COLLECTIVE benefits. [View all] sibelian Feb 2015 OP

I'm in fucking awe how they are controlling this message Autumn Feb 2015 #1

I think I love you! marym625 Feb 2015 #2

As far as I'm concerned? Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #3

Presumably you're talking about me, which means that you missed the part of my OP DanTex Feb 2015 #8

Post removed Post removed Feb 2015 #11

No need for the personal attack. DanTex Feb 2015 #17

US vaccination rate is 91%. Herd immunity rate is 95%. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #18

Wiser choice for society. Not necessarily for the individual. Again, those are different things. DanTex Feb 2015 #19

"What's best for the individual" doesn't enter into it. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #20

That's a value judgement. DanTex Feb 2015 #21

Yours is the only intentional ignorance I'm seeing here. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #23

OK then. I take it you have no response. DanTex Feb 2015 #24

Facts and science: Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #25

Hmm, so you didn't read my OP at all. You're so blinded by dogma... DanTex Feb 2015 #26

Yes. sibelian Feb 2015 #73

I love the mathematical "logical" argument using phony data from the VAERS database. MohRokTah Feb 2015 #4

That was you marym625 Feb 2015 #5

Yep, the closest we can get is harm caused by vaccines. MohRokTah Feb 2015 #39

ain't it though! marym625 Feb 2015 #40

LOL @ "real numbers". DanTex Feb 2015 #42

evidently marym625 Feb 2015 #45

Math not being your strong suit. DanTex Feb 2015 #41

Sorry genius marym625 Feb 2015 #44

You know how percentages work, right? Are you familiar with this symbol: "%" DanTex Feb 2015 #51

You are right marym625 Feb 2015 #52

Yes I am. Good call to switching tactics to name-calling. It suits you much better than math. DanTex Feb 2015 #53

I am actually marym625 Feb 2015 #54

Of course you are. The second coming of Euler, right here on DU! Obviously... DanTex Feb 2015 #55

He's wrong again marym625 Feb 2015 #46

I ignore the anti-Vaxxers. MohRokTah Feb 2015 #47

Yes. I see that now marym625 Feb 2015 #48

That sort of thinking is not confined to anti=Vaxxers. MohRokTah Feb 2015 #49

Awesome! marym625 Feb 2015 #50

Is there a better source than VAERS about adverse reactions? DanTex Feb 2015 #7

VAERS data has nothing to do with adverse reactions to MMR MohRokTah Feb 2015 #30

Right, but we need to estimate this number in order to make any kind of rational decision. DanTex Feb 2015 #31

Then the estimate must be ZERO deaths due to MMR. MohRokTah Feb 2015 #32

LOL. Yes, 0%. With a confidence interval of lower than one in a million. DanTex Feb 2015 #35

You were cold hard busted posting anti-vax bullshit and got your OP hidden for it Major Nikon Feb 2015 #56

Yeah, umm, no, that's not what happened. DanTex Feb 2015 #60

Two questions Major Nikon Feb 2015 #62

Answers. DanTex Feb 2015 #64

Actually I'd rather show your work Major Nikon Feb 2015 #67

So you're dodging my questions. Just as I expected. DanTex Feb 2015 #69

Well is there one? A better source than VAERS? DanTex Feb 2015 #22

VAERS data suggests NOTHING about the number of deaths from reaction to MMR MohRokTah Feb 2015 #29

Awesome. So, according to you, we know absolutely nothing about the risks of the MMR DanTex Feb 2015 #33

Good bye MohRokTah Feb 2015 #34

Good bye. Ignore is a good option when math isn't working out for you. DanTex Feb 2015 #36

Sure, because correlation proving causation is so rational Major Nikon Feb 2015 #59

You're missing the point completely. DanTex Feb 2015 #61

What part of this bullshit am I missing? Major Nikon Feb 2015 #63

Again, missing the point, and dodging questions. Not looking good for you. DanTex Feb 2015 #65

Oh, and since you don't seem to like thinking for yourself, here's an article by an MPH making DanTex Feb 2015 #66

Wow! Two replies even. Major Nikon Feb 2015 #68

OK, clearly you don't actually care about the substance of the argument, you just like the feeling DanTex Feb 2015 #70

That WAS the substance of your argument Major Nikon Feb 2015 #74

Again, I don't think you realize the absurdity of what you are saying. DanTex Feb 2015 #75

Oooops! Strawman. Gotta call bullshit. Death and risk don't even sound the same. Major Nikon Feb 2015 #76

Cute. I'm talking about risk of death. LOL. DanTex Feb 2015 #77

Why are you afraid of talking about those 86 deaths you duplicitously attributed to the MMR vaccine? Major Nikon Feb 2015 #78

Dodge. Again. Getting boring. DanTex Feb 2015 #79

You have yet to walk back this statement and even claimed it was "absolutely not" bullshit Major Nikon Feb 2015 #80

Enough going in circles. You've got nothing. This conversation has run its course. DanTex Feb 2015 #84

You stole my line! Major Nikon Feb 2015 #85

Yes, that was insane and THANK YOU for posting that. sibelian Feb 2015 #72

Exactly. I agree. Individually, it may not be a net beneficial decision, but for society as a DanTex Feb 2015 #6

I almost wish that thread wasn't locked. marym625 Feb 2015 #9

Pretty surprising, huh. I actually advocated in favor of mandatory vaccinations, DanTex Feb 2015 #10

I edited my reply here marym625 Feb 2015 #13

Here's the a quote from the OP. DanTex Feb 2015 #15

I didn't see you advocate in favour of mandatory vaccinations, at all. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2015 #14

I didn't "advocate" in favor of individual decisions, what I did is recognize that an individual DanTex Feb 2015 #16

Too bad your otherthread got locked...conditioned vs unconditioned risk and their impact on thinking HereSince1628 Feb 2015 #12

skipping vx to "a disease that barely exists" DUE TO vaccinations is not risky? uppityperson Feb 2015 #27

Yes. Exactly that. DanTex Feb 2015 #28

You opened the Cabinet of Dr Lilly. ucrdem Feb 2015 #38

Great, let's collectivize the profits instead of the liability: ucrdem Feb 2015 #37

That law was sponsored by Henry Waxman (D) Major Nikon Feb 2015 #58

So is eradication of poverty. LWolf Feb 2015 #43

It's funny that Jamaal510 Feb 2015 #57

Which is why conservatives are turning against it... Fumesucker Feb 2015 #71

It also contributes to our environmental situation The2ndWheel Feb 2015 #81

Message auto-removed Name removed Feb 2015 #82

... greatauntoftriplets Feb 2015 #83

Oh snap! William769 Feb 2015 #86

He looks so young there! greatauntoftriplets Feb 2015 #87

He's still young at heart besides all the bullshit thrown at him. William769 Feb 2015 #89

True. greatauntoftriplets Feb 2015 #90

I see what you did there. William769 Feb 2015 #91

... greatauntoftriplets Feb 2015 #92

Sounds like socialism to me. n/t leeroysphitz Feb 2015 #88