Principia Discordia

I feel like punching Alex Jones right in the fucking face.

Quote
The largest U.S. outbreak of measles to occur in 15 years -- affecting 214 children so far -- is likely driven by travelers returning from abroad and by too many unvaccinated U.S. children, according to new research.

The finding could highlight the dangers of a trend among some U.S. parents to skip the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine for their children, out of what many experts call misguided fears over its safety.

Dr. Andrew Pavia, professor of pediatrics at the University of Utah and spokesman for the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), said, "The good news is that we are seeing introductions of measles that are being contained as small outbreaks."

Pavia credits containment to high levels of vaccination and thevacci rapid response by public health officials. However, if an outbreak occurred in a "really susceptible population the outcome could be very different," he said.

http://yourlife.usatoday.com/health/story/2011-10-21/Unvaccinated-behind-largest-US-measles-outbreak-in-years/50852098/1

Tinfoilhating around is all fun and games until a little kid is crippled by Polio.

I'd fucking laugh, but those kids didn't deserve to ghet sick just because their fucking parents are morons. I'd like to punch each and every one of them in the face. Assholes.

What's the anti-vaccer reaction to this? Do they ignore it, pretending like it didn't happen? Do they say it's god's will? Do they write it off as being an acceptable risk for saving their children from a significantly lower risk?

Not that any of these are good reasons. I just want to know what form of idiocy is driving car.

Quote from: 'Kai' ZLB, M.S. on October 25, 2011, 01:25:26 AM
What's the anti-vaccer reaction to this? Do they ignore it, pretending like it didn't happen? Do they say it's god's will? Do they write it off as being an acceptable risk for saving their children from a significantly lower risk?

Not that any of these are good reasons. I just want to know what form of idiocy is driving car.

Id love to know this, too.

It's lack of education in the right direction.  No one's sat down and showed them pictures of deformed children who've had a bad case of anything that is taken care of through the MMR vaccine.  If they HAD, then said "don't stick MY child with those needles!" parents would reverse course...immediately.

I have a feeling their reaction to children getting the diseases they don't need to be at risk for is pretty laissez-faire, mainly due to the fact they won't own up to their own idiocy in not preventing it.

Quote from: 'Kai' ZLB, M.S. on October 25, 2011, 01:25:26 AM
What's the anti-vaccer reaction to this? Do they ignore it, pretending like it didn't happen? Do they say it's god's will? Do they write it off as being an acceptable risk for saving their children from a significantly lower risk?

Not that any of these are good reasons. I just want to know what form of idiocy is driving car.

They are in the comments on the linked article.

:punchballs:

Quote from: 'Kai' ZLB, M.S. on October 25, 2011, 01:25:26 AM
What's the anti-vaccer reaction to this? Do they ignore it, pretending like it didn't happen? Do they say it's god's will? Do they write it off as being an acceptable risk for saving their children from a significantly lower risk?

Not that any of these are good reasons. I just want to know what form of idiocy is driving car.

"The fact remains, my child getting measles is better than them getting autism, or dying due to some NWO engineered virus designed to kill us all off."

Quote from: Cain on October 25, 2011, 03:18:34 PM

Quote from: 'Kai' ZLB, M.S. on October 25, 2011, 01:25:26 AM
What's the anti-vaccer reaction to this? Do they ignore it, pretending like it didn't happen? Do they say it's god's will? Do they write it off as being an acceptable risk for saving their children from a significantly lower risk?

Not that any of these are good reasons. I just want to know what form of idiocy is driving car.

"The fact remains, my child getting measles is better than them getting autism, or dying due to some NWO engineered virus designed to kill us all off."

That's it. I'm siding with the NWO right now just to get rid of stupid fucks like this. Maybe I'll become a high ranking officer in the Antichrist's personal guard. Break out the FEMA coffins and open up the Satanic death camps!

Quote from: 'Kai' ZLB, M.S. on October 25, 2011, 01:25:26 AM
What's the anti-vaccer reaction to this? Do they ignore it, pretending like it didn't happen? Do they say it's god's will? Do they write it off as being an acceptable risk for saving their children from a significantly lower risk?

During the last measles outbreak in Norway, some homeopath claimed that measles is a transformative disease that makes you grow as a person, and that vaccination deprives us of this. She also said that although she thinks measles is good for most children, some may die, but only the ones who are already weak.  

This is why I hate anti-vaccination people. HATE. LOATHE. DESPISE. Also you know who else? I FUCKING HATE NATUROPATHS. Not all of them; some are quite decent practitioners. But there is a sizable contingent who focus on homeopathic "medicine" and shun medical science to the detriment of their patients, and these are the ones I would gladly burn alive.

Well, those that want the population to diminish, they should applaud this, as one of the side effects of these diseases is sterlization...

Again, I think the blase attitude would change if someone passed around pictures like how they did in Health class back in the old says--you see a series of syphillitic, pustulant dicks and vages, and you REALLY start to think you don't mind the jimmy-hat so much.

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 25, 2011, 06:26:02 PM

Quote from: Cain on October 25, 2011, 03:18:34 PM

Quote from: 'Kai' ZLB, M.S. on October 25, 2011, 01:25:26 AM
What's the anti-vaccer reaction to this? Do they ignore it, pretending like it didn't happen? Do they say it's god's will? Do they write it off as being an acceptable risk for saving their children from a significantly lower risk?

Not that any of these are good reasons. I just want to know what form of idiocy is driving car.

"The fact remains, my child getting measles is better than them getting autism, or dying due to some NWO engineered virus designed to kill us all off."

That's it. I'm siding with the NWO right now just to get rid of stupid fucks like this. Maybe I'll become a high ranking officer in the Antichrist's personal guard. Break out the FEMA coffins and open up the Satanic death camps!

I'm with you. Let the cleansing begin.

Goddamn it, this is just fucking nauseating....

Andrew Wakefield and Jenny McCarthy will be along to apologize any moment, I'm sure.

I thought that they ended up finding no connection to the MMR and autism? Apparently I gave the American public too much credit when it comes to reading.

Quote from: Suu on October 25, 2011, 11:18:37 PM
I thought that they ended up finding no connection to the MMR and autism? Apparently I gave the American public too much credit when it comes to reading.

Actually, what they found out was that Wakefield faked his data in the first place.

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on October 25, 2011, 11:25:24 PM

Quote from: Suu on October 25, 2011, 11:18:37 PM
I thought that they ended up finding no connection to the MMR and autism? Apparently I gave the American public too much credit when it comes to reading.

Actually, what they found out was that Wakefield faked his data in the first place.

You wanna see what's awesome? His fanatical supporters absolutely refuse to believe he's been discredited: http://gaia-health.com/gaia-blog/2011-10-10/andrew-wakefield-speaks-to-private-us-physicians-on-the-smear-campaign-against-him/

Quote from: Nigel on October 25, 2011, 11:37:55 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on October 25, 2011, 11:25:24 PM

Quote from: Suu on October 25, 2011, 11:18:37 PM
I thought that they ended up finding no connection to the MMR and autism? Apparently I gave the American public too much credit when it comes to reading.

Actually, what they found out was that Wakefield faked his data in the first place.

You wanna see what's awesome? His fanatical supporters absolutely refuse to believe he's been discredited: http://gaia-health.com/gaia-blog/2011-10-10/andrew-wakefield-speaks-to-private-us-physicians-on-the-smear-campaign-against-him/

Of course.  They have to blame their childrens' conditions on SOMETHING, right?

The smear campaign against him.   :lulz:

I FAKED MY DATA BUT IT DOESN'T MAKE IT NOT TRUE!

:facepalm:

Quote from: Doktor Phox on October 25, 2011, 10:28:40 PM

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 25, 2011, 06:26:02 PM

Quote from: Cain on October 25, 2011, 03:18:34 PM

Quote from: 'Kai' ZLB, M.S. on October 25, 2011, 01:25:26 AM
What's the anti-vaccer reaction to this? Do they ignore it, pretending like it didn't happen? Do they say it's god's will? Do they write it off as being an acceptable risk for saving their children from a significantly lower risk?

Not that any of these are good reasons. I just want to know what form of idiocy is driving car.

"The fact remains, my child getting measles is better than them getting autism, or dying due to some NWO engineered virus designed to kill us all off."

That's it. I'm siding with the NWO right now just to get rid of stupid fucks like this. Maybe I'll become a high ranking officer in the Antichrist's personal guard. Break out the FEMA coffins and open up the Satanic death camps!

I'm with you. Let the cleansing begin.

Goddamn it, this is just fucking nauseating....

Isn't it though? Fucking hell.

My grandma contracted polio the same year Salk came up with the vaccine for it.

Do you see people any worse for not having contracted polio? I rather like being able to walk.

Jesus fucking christ.  I had measles and mumps as a kid. It meant two weeks off school each time. BFD.

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 02:25:37 AM
Jesus fucking christ.  I had measles and mumps as a kid. It meant two weeks off school each time. BFD.

BFD for you, sure.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1712354/

QuoteMeasles has caused millions of deaths since its emergence thousands of years ago, probably as a zoonosis [1]. Deaths from measles are due largely to an increased susceptibility to secondary bacterial and viral infections. This period of increased susceptibility lasts for several weeks to months after the onset of rash [2] and is attributed to a prolonged state of immune suppression. Most deaths associated with measles are due to pneumonia [3]. Although the global mortality from measles is falling [4], a new study in PLoS Medicine found that children in Nigeria, Niger, and Chad still recently faced unacceptably high mortality from measles [5], a largely preventable disease.

I guess the kids that die of it don't really count.

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 03:28:30 AM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 02:25:37 AM
Jesus fucking christ.  I had measles and mumps as a kid. It meant two weeks off school each time. BFD.

BFD for you, sure.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1712354/

QuoteMeasles has caused millions of deaths since its emergence thousands of years ago, probably as a zoonosis [1]. Deaths from measles are due largely to an increased susceptibility to secondary bacterial and viral infections. This period of increased susceptibility lasts for several weeks to months after the onset of rash [2] and is attributed to a prolonged state of immune suppression. Most deaths associated with measles are due to pneumonia [3]. Although the global mortality from measles is falling [4], a new study in PLoS Medicine found that children in Nigeria, Niger, and Chad still recently faced unacceptably high mortality from measles [5], a largely preventable disease.

I guess the kids that die of it don't really count.

8 billion people the planet, untold abortions daily, untold starvation deaths every year, 241 measles deaths every year. Nah, not such a big deal at all.

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 03:34:33 AM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 03:28:30 AM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 02:25:37 AM
Jesus fucking christ.  I had measles and mumps as a kid. It meant two weeks off school each time. BFD.

BFD for you, sure.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1712354/

QuoteMeasles has caused millions of deaths since its emergence thousands of years ago, probably as a zoonosis [1]. Deaths from measles are due largely to an increased susceptibility to secondary bacterial and viral infections. This period of increased susceptibility lasts for several weeks to months after the onset of rash [2] and is attributed to a prolonged state of immune suppression. Most deaths associated with measles are due to pneumonia [3]. Although the global mortality from measles is falling [4], a new study in PLoS Medicine found that children in Nigeria, Niger, and Chad still recently faced unacceptably high mortality from measles [5], a largely preventable disease.

I guess the kids that die of it don't really count.

8 billion people the planet, untold abortions daily, untold starvation deaths every year, 241 measles deaths every year. Nah, not such a big deal at all.

How many deaths annually pre-vaccination?

I don't give a fuck about abortion, that's just a clump of cell tissue IMO. It's not a person.

The starvation is utterly unacceptable, and so is death from preventable disease like measles.

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 03:36:48 AM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 03:34:33 AM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 03:28:30 AM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 02:25:37 AM
Jesus fucking christ.  I had measles and mumps as a kid. It meant two weeks off school each time. BFD.

BFD for you, sure.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1712354/

QuoteMeasles has caused millions of deaths since its emergence thousands of years ago, probably as a zoonosis [1]. Deaths from measles are due largely to an increased susceptibility to secondary bacterial and viral infections. This period of increased susceptibility lasts for several weeks to months after the onset of rash [2] and is attributed to a prolonged state of immune suppression. Most deaths associated with measles are due to pneumonia [3]. Although the global mortality from measles is falling [4], a new study in PLoS Medicine found that children in Nigeria, Niger, and Chad still recently faced unacceptably high mortality from measles [5], a largely preventable disease.

I guess the kids that die of it don't really count.

8 billion people the planet, untold abortions daily, untold starvation deaths every year, 241 measles deaths every year. Nah, not such a big deal at all.

How many deaths annually pre-vaccination?

I don't give a fuck about abortion, that's just a clump of cell tissue IMO. It's not a person.

The starvation is utterly unacceptable, and so is death from preventable disease like measles.

Nigeria, Niger and Chad have a very high annual rate of infant and child deaths. Measles is not the issue here.

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 03:39:39 AM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 03:36:48 AM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 03:34:33 AM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 03:28:30 AM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 02:25:37 AM
Jesus fucking christ.  I had measles and mumps as a kid. It meant two weeks off school each time. BFD.

BFD for you, sure.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1712354/

QuoteMeasles has caused millions of deaths since its emergence thousands of years ago, probably as a zoonosis [1]. Deaths from measles are due largely to an increased susceptibility to secondary bacterial and viral infections. This period of increased susceptibility lasts for several weeks to months after the onset of rash [2] and is attributed to a prolonged state of immune suppression. Most deaths associated with measles are due to pneumonia [3]. Although the global mortality from measles is falling [4], a new study in PLoS Medicine found that children in Nigeria, Niger, and Chad still recently faced unacceptably high mortality from measles [5], a largely preventable disease.

I guess the kids that die of it don't really count.

8 billion people the planet, untold abortions daily, untold starvation deaths every year, 241 measles deaths every year. Nah, not such a big deal at all.

How many deaths annually pre-vaccination?

I don't give a fuck about abortion, that's just a clump of cell tissue IMO. It's not a person.

The starvation is utterly unacceptable, and so is death from preventable disease like measles.

Nigeria, Niger and Chad have a very high annual rate of infant and child deaths. Measles is not the issue here.

It's certainly not the biggest issue, no. There is a lot of terrible shit going down there. But nonetheless, needless preventable deaths/lifelong complications are still a big deal IMO... and we were talking about vaccination and measles outbreaks in the US. 

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 03:51:22 AM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 03:39:39 AM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 03:36:48 AM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 03:34:33 AM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 03:28:30 AM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 02:25:37 AM
Jesus fucking christ.  I had measles and mumps as a kid. It meant two weeks off school each time. BFD.

BFD for you, sure.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1712354/

QuoteMeasles has caused millions of deaths since its emergence thousands of years ago, probably as a zoonosis [1]. Deaths from measles are due largely to an increased susceptibility to secondary bacterial and viral infections. This period of increased susceptibility lasts for several weeks to months after the onset of rash [2] and is attributed to a prolonged state of immune suppression. Most deaths associated with measles are due to pneumonia [3]. Although the global mortality from measles is falling [4], a new study in PLoS Medicine found that children in Nigeria, Niger, and Chad still recently faced unacceptably high mortality from measles [5], a largely preventable disease.

I guess the kids that die of it don't really count.

8 billion people the planet, untold abortions daily, untold starvation deaths every year, 241 measles deaths every year. Nah, not such a big deal at all.

How many deaths annually pre-vaccination?

I don't give a fuck about abortion, that's just a clump of cell tissue IMO. It's not a person.

The starvation is utterly unacceptable, and so is death from preventable disease like measles.

Nigeria, Niger and Chad have a very high annual rate of infant and child deaths. Measles is not the issue here.

It's certainly not the biggest issue, no. There is a lot of terrible shit going down there. But nonetheless, needless preventable deaths/lifelong complications are still a big deal IMO... and we were talking about vaccination and measles outbreaks in the US. 

Then let's discuss inbreeding, malnutrition and drug use. Let us talk about equality of education and opportunity. Hell, we can even discuss availability of health care.

Any kind of preventable death is bad and stupid.  The PROBLEM, the real problem here, is that people are actively against a prevention of a stupid, bad death.

Or even a bunch of them. 

You are still only addressing symptoms of a greater problem and not the solution.

Whatever.

Whatever.

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 04:05:28 AM
You are still only addressing symptoms of a greater problem and not the solution.

Symptoms can also be problems, especially in a humongous web of cause and effect like our world.

Quote from: Epimetheus on October 27, 2011, 04:22:39 AM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 04:05:28 AM
You are still only addressing symptoms of a greater problem and not the solution.

Symptoms can also be problems, especially in a humongous web of cause and effect like our world.

*shrug*

Obviously I am wrong by being reasonable, therefore I back out of this thread.

"One death is a tragedy.  A million deaths is a statistic."
- Uncle Joe "anything for a laugh" Stalin

I just don't buy into the "Other problems are worse, therefore people willfully spreading ant-vaccination propaganda isn't really a problem" argument.

Is there an official name for the fallacy of "criticism of A is invalid, because B is so much worse"?

The two party system.

Quote from: Cain on October 27, 2011, 02:20:15 PM
The two party system.

:lulz:
I think it's actually called "Nirvana falacy".

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 02:25:37 AM
Jesus fucking christ.  I had measles and mumps as a kid. It meant two weeks off school each time. BFD.

Methinks, my dear Hawk, you were one of the lucky ones. 

And all your points about educating the public at large so that they don't inbreed, know proper hygeine and nutrition, know when to take advantage of FREE health care (in a large number of cases, vaccinations are free for MMR)...so very very valid.

To me, this all dovetails together into the same issue.  Education.

Those refusing the vaccine are sort of like those who believe in a flat earth.  Nice little belief in isolation, but really, where does it put you on the spectrum of reality?

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 27, 2011, 01:31:28 PM
Is there an official name for the fallacy of "criticism of A is invalid, because B is so much worse"?

Kai has coined the phrase Dawkins Fallacy for it, which I like, because he's kind of a douche.

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 03:09:19 PM

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 27, 2011, 01:31:28 PM
Is there an official name for the fallacy of "criticism of A is invalid, because B is so much worse"?

Kai has coined the phrase Dawkins Fallacy for it, which I like, because he's kind of a douche.

Excellent!

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 03:34:47 PM

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 03:09:19 PM

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 27, 2011, 01:31:28 PM
Is there an official name for the fallacy of "criticism of A is invalid, because B is so much worse"?

Kai has coined the phrase Dawkins Fallacy for it, which I like, because he's kind of a douche.

Excellent!

I forget what thread it is, but it reflects his recent statements that basically tell western women to shut up about sexual harassment because Muslim women have it shittier because their Muslims.

Which is not only a retarded argument but also shows:
a) He's Islamophobic
b) Thinks sexually harassing women is acceptable
c) He's a douche

While looking up fallacies, I found this: http://richarddawkins.net/discussions/641922-the-wtf-fallacy-and-others

which reminded me of how much I hate atheists, because they are such pompous dicks. If I was World Empress, I would get anti-vaccers, rabid atheists, Anarchists, and Libertarians together in a big catered conference and not let anyone leave until they reached consensus.

Oxford Don has regressive and antiquated views on women shocker.

Not that I'm suggesting Dawkins' views are in any way to do with the time-honoured tradition of undergrad students sleeping with professors in order to get better grades, but I am suggesting just that.

Quote from: Cain on October 27, 2011, 03:47:10 PM
Oxford Don has regressive and antiquated views on women shocker.

Not that I'm suggesting Dawkins' views are in any way to do with the time-honoured tradition of undergrad students sleeping with professors in order to get better grades, but I am suggesting just that.

:lulz:

Also

:vom:

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 03:45:08 PM
While looking up fallacies, I found this: http://richarddawkins.net/discussions/641922-the-wtf-fallacy-and-others

which reminded me of how much I hate atheists, because they are such pompous dicks. If I was World Empress, I would get anti-vaccers, rabid atheists, Anarchists, and Libertarians together in a big catered conference and not let anyone leave until they reached consensus.

That's the whole thing. Atheists have been around for ages. If someone back in the 1970s said they were an atheist, it would probably just be left at that, and you'd file it away as an interesting fact about that person. The New Atheists though, make it an identity. They let it define them, and they will let you know how retarded you are for believing in magical Sky-Daddy.

Ok, maybe. But you don't have to be a dick about it. And making a career out of it just makes you an Evangelist.

More to the point, telling people they are retarded for their beliefs doesn't actually shame them into thinking about it and perhaps abandoning their faith, if anything, it tends to make them more obstinate in their beliefs.

If you're looking to actually make people more secular and more rational in their daily lives, castigating them for being a dumb motherfucker isn't really going to work now, is it?

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 03:56:34 PM

Quote from: Cain on October 27, 2011, 03:47:10 PM
Oxford Don has regressive and antiquated views on women shocker.

Not that I'm suggesting Dawkins' views are in any way to do with the time-honoured tradition of undergrad students sleeping with professors in order to get better grades, but I am suggesting just that.

:lulz:

Also

:vom:

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 03:45:08 PM
While looking up fallacies, I found this: http://richarddawkins.net/discussions/641922-the-wtf-fallacy-and-others

which reminded me of how much I hate atheists, because they are such pompous dicks. If I was World Empress, I would get anti-vaccers, rabid atheists, Anarchists, and Libertarians together in a big catered conference and not let anyone leave until they reached consensus.

That's the whole thing. Atheists have been around for ages. If someone back in the 1970s said they were an atheist, it would probably just be left at that, and you'd file it away as an interesting fact about that person. The New Atheists though, make it an identity. They let it define them, and they will let you know how retarded you are for believing in magical Sky-Daddy.

Ok, maybe. But you don't have to be a dick about it. And making a career out of it just makes you an Evangelist.

One of the many reasons I loathe them is because they almost unfailingly sport the attitude that the mere fact that they are atheists automatically makes them smarter than everybody else. Gosh, maybe if they wielded that massive intellect to some other purpose than patting themselves on the back for not believing in something imaginary, they could actually accomplish something other than being divisive and making enemies.

Another reason I loathe them is because rabid atheists are exactly the same kind of people as rabid Christians, and in fact have a disturbing tendency to jump the fence from time to time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ghIU_tlX0k

Actually the funny thing is I think Jasper had one of those moments here- I seem to recall him posting something to the effect of, "It pisses me off when theists say atheism is the same as fundamentalist religion. I'm starting to think that's because they may have a point."

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 03:39:39 AM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 03:36:48 AM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 03:34:33 AM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 03:28:30 AM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 02:25:37 AM
Jesus fucking christ.  I had measles and mumps as a kid. It meant two weeks off school each time. BFD.

BFD for you, sure.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1712354/

QuoteMeasles has caused millions of deaths since its emergence thousands of years ago, probably as a zoonosis [1]. Deaths from measles are due largely to an increased susceptibility to secondary bacterial and viral infections. This period of increased susceptibility lasts for several weeks to months after the onset of rash [2] and is attributed to a prolonged state of immune suppression. Most deaths associated with measles are due to pneumonia [3]. Although the global mortality from measles is falling [4], a new study in PLoS Medicine found that children in Nigeria, Niger, and Chad still recently faced unacceptably high mortality from measles [5], a largely preventable disease.

I guess the kids that die of it don't really count.

8 billion people the planet, untold abortions daily, untold starvation deaths every year, 241 measles deaths every year. Nah, not such a big deal at all.

How many deaths annually pre-vaccination?

I don't give a fuck about abortion, that's just a clump of cell tissue IMO. It's not a person.

The starvation is utterly unacceptable, and so is death from preventable disease like measles.

Nigeria, Niger and Chad have a very high annual rate of infant and child deaths. Measles is not the issue here.

Measles may not be THAT bad of a disease but as someone stated earlier, any preventable death is bad.

You have to look at it in context, this happened because parents refused to get vaccinations for Measles. What else did they refuse to vaccinate against? When will we be having polio outbreaks? When will kids start dying of the flu again?

Quote from: Cain on October 27, 2011, 04:03:47 PM
More to the point, telling people they are retarded for their beliefs doesn't actually shame them into thinking about it and perhaps abandoning their faith, if anything, it tends to make them more obstinate in their beliefs.

If you're looking to actually make people more secular and more rational in their daily lives, castigating them for being a dumb motherfucker isn't really going to work now, is it?

Exactly this. What they accomplish, other than smug self-satisfaction over embracing an identity that amounts to approximately the same degree of usefulness as refusing to believe that Skeletor rules the dark side of the moon, is to reinforce (and then patrol with guns) the border between religious and non-religious people. They serve exactly the same function as racists and homophobes, and I wonder whether, without the Dawkins-era atheists poking at them, Christian Fundamentalists would still feel so threatened that they would be pushing for their agendas to be heard in public schools? One is surely a reaction to the other, and the two opposing forces must, by nature, escalate in response to each other.

Quote from: Cain on October 27, 2011, 04:03:47 PM
More to the point, telling people they are retarded for their beliefs doesn't actually shame them into thinking about it and perhaps abandoning their faith, if anything, it tends to make them more obstinate in their beliefs.

If you're looking to actually make people more secular and more rational in their daily lives, castigating them for being a dumb motherfucker isn't really going to work now, is it?

Nothing makes you more sure about your position than perceived oppression.

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 03:06:13 PM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 02:25:37 AM
Jesus fucking christ.  I had measles and mumps as a kid. It meant two weeks off school each time. BFD.

Methinks, my dear Hawk, you were one of the lucky ones. 

And all your points about educating the public at large so that they don't inbreed, know proper hygeine and nutrition, know when to take advantage of FREE health care (in a large number of cases, vaccinations are free for MMR)...so very very valid.

To me, this all dovetails together into the same issue.  Education.

Those refusing the vaccine are sort of like those who believe in a flat earth.  Nice little belief in isolation, but really, where does it put you on the spectrum of reality?

At least one person didn't see what I was saying as criticism or being snarky, thank you Jenne.

Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on October 27, 2011, 04:10:16 PM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 03:39:39 AM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 03:36:48 AM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 03:34:33 AM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 03:28:30 AM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 02:25:37 AM
Jesus fucking christ.  I had measles and mumps as a kid. It meant two weeks off school each time. BFD.

BFD for you, sure.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1712354/

QuoteMeasles has caused millions of deaths since its emergence thousands of years ago, probably as a zoonosis [1]. Deaths from measles are due largely to an increased susceptibility to secondary bacterial and viral infections. This period of increased susceptibility lasts for several weeks to months after the onset of rash [2] and is attributed to a prolonged state of immune suppression. Most deaths associated with measles are due to pneumonia [3]. Although the global mortality from measles is falling [4], a new study in PLoS Medicine found that children in Nigeria, Niger, and Chad still recently faced unacceptably high mortality from measles [5], a largely preventable disease.

I guess the kids that die of it don't really count.

8 billion people the planet, untold abortions daily, untold starvation deaths every year, 241 measles deaths every year. Nah, not such a big deal at all.

How many deaths annually pre-vaccination?

I don't give a fuck about abortion, that's just a clump of cell tissue IMO. It's not a person.

The starvation is utterly unacceptable, and so is death from preventable disease like measles.

Nigeria, Niger and Chad have a very high annual rate of infant and child deaths. Measles is not the issue here.

Measles may not be THAT bad of a disease but as someone stated earlier, any preventable death is bad.

You have to look at it in context, this happened because parents refused to get vaccinations for Measles. What else did they refuse to vaccinate against? When will we be having polio outbreaks? When will kids start dying of the flu again?

Also, with 8 billion people on the planet, WITHOUT measles vaccination, the annual deaths from measles would be in the millions. The reason there are only 241 measles deaths per year is BECAUSE OF VACCINATION. This should not have to be said, but apparently it does.

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 04:20:40 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 03:06:13 PM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 02:25:37 AM
Jesus fucking christ.  I had measles and mumps as a kid. It meant two weeks off school each time. BFD.

Methinks, my dear Hawk, you were one of the lucky ones. 

And all your points about educating the public at large so that they don't inbreed, know proper hygeine and nutrition, know when to take advantage of FREE health care (in a large number of cases, vaccinations are free for MMR)...so very very valid.

To me, this all dovetails together into the same issue.  Education.

Those refusing the vaccine are sort of like those who believe in a flat earth.  Nice little belief in isolation, but really, where does it put you on the spectrum of reality?

At least one person didn't see what I was saying as criticism or being snarky, thank you Jenne.

If almost everyone perceives a comment as being critical or snarky, odds are it's got something to do with the way you presented it. "Jesus fucking christ.  I had measles and mumps as a kid. It meant two weeks off school each time. BFD." comes off as pretty critical and snarky, IMO. And you did then go on to further criticize the importance of vaccination, which reinforced that perception.

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 04:23:59 PM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 04:20:40 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 03:06:13 PM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 02:25:37 AM
Jesus fucking christ.  I had measles and mumps as a kid. It meant two weeks off school each time. BFD.

Methinks, my dear Hawk, you were one of the lucky ones. 

And all your points about educating the public at large so that they don't inbreed, know proper hygeine and nutrition, know when to take advantage of FREE health care (in a large number of cases, vaccinations are free for MMR)...so very very valid.

To me, this all dovetails together into the same issue.  Education.

Those refusing the vaccine are sort of like those who believe in a flat earth.  Nice little belief in isolation, but really, where does it put you on the spectrum of reality?

At least one person didn't see what I was saying as criticism or being snarky, thank you Jenne.

If almost everyone perceives a comment as being critical or snarky, odds are it's got something to do with the way you presented it. "Jesus fucking christ.  I had measles and mumps as a kid. It meant two weeks off school each time. BFD." comes off as pretty critical and snarky, IMO. And you did then go on to further criticize the importance of vaccination, which reinforced that perception.

WHATEVER YOU SAY.

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 04:20:40 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 03:06:13 PM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 02:25:37 AM
Jesus fucking christ.  I had measles and mumps as a kid. It meant two weeks off school each time. BFD.

Methinks, my dear Hawk, you were one of the lucky ones. 

And all your points about educating the public at large so that they don't inbreed, know proper hygeine and nutrition, know when to take advantage of FREE health care (in a large number of cases, vaccinations are free for MMR)...so very very valid.

To me, this all dovetails together into the same issue.  Education.

Those refusing the vaccine are sort of like those who believe in a flat earth.  Nice little belief in isolation, but really, where does it put you on the spectrum of reality?

At least one person didn't see what I was saying as criticism or being snarky, thank you Jenne.

:) 

My thinking is thus:  there's so many facets as to why the sort of reasoning  that vaccinations aren't necessary amongst those of a rich, 1st world country is badwrong...it's marking a time in our history where, despite having all facts pointing to its logic, folks are willing to take a stand against worldwide inoculation SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY CAN.

I think that's what it comes down to.

THEY DISLIKE BEING TOLD BY GOVERNMENT WHAT THEY SHOULD DO. 

It's why the HPV vaccine, which the CDC just recommended for boys even though  many pediatricians have been recommending it for them already since it came out, has had such a hard time getting traction.  Folks are thinking about the wrong end of the spectrum and telling themselves "I get my kid vaccinated, s/he'll think they can go out and fuck like bunnies."

Instead of the way the CDC is looking at it, which is: "We get these boys and girls vacc'd NOW, and 30-40 years down the line they won't have cancer!"

Again, the dumbass American public is seeing this as a parents' rights issue (same with the MMR vaccine), and not a "we the people are grateful that we can finally fight diseases that other governments around the world cannot afford to or can't be arsed to deal with in the midst of their military coups."

I know TL, DR, but that's sorta how I see it.

I can kinda see that.

It does give me a vague idea of how to use conspiracy theory to maybe combat this. Such as put the idea out there that the anti-vaccine movement is part of the NWO agenda to reduce the human population without getting blood on its hands. Let the people choose to get sick and die sort of thing.

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 04:30:20 PM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 04:20:40 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 03:06:13 PM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 02:25:37 AM
Jesus fucking christ.  I had measles and mumps as a kid. It meant two weeks off school each time. BFD.

Methinks, my dear Hawk, you were one of the lucky ones. 

And all your points about educating the public at large so that they don't inbreed, know proper hygeine and nutrition, know when to take advantage of FREE health care (in a large number of cases, vaccinations are free for MMR)...so very very valid.

To me, this all dovetails together into the same issue.  Education.

Those refusing the vaccine are sort of like those who believe in a flat earth.  Nice little belief in isolation, but really, where does it put you on the spectrum of reality?

At least one person didn't see what I was saying as criticism or being snarky, thank you Jenne.

:) 

My thinking is thus:  there's so many facets as to why the sort of reasoning  that vaccinations aren't necessary amongst those of a rich, 1st world country is badwrong...it's marking a time in our history where, despite having all facts pointing to its logic, folks are willing to take a stand against worldwide inoculation SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY CAN.

I think that's what it comes down to.

THEY DISLIKE BEING TOLD BY GOVERNMENT WHAT THEY SHOULD DO. 

It's why the HPV vaccine, which the CDC just recommended for boys even though  many pediatricians have been recommending it for them already since it came out, has had such a hard time getting traction.  Folks are thinking about the wrong end of the spectrum and telling themselves "I get my kid vaccinated, s/he'll think they can go out and fuck like bunnies."

Instead of the way the CDC is looking at it, which is: "We get these boys and girls vacc'd NOW, and 30-40 years down the line they won't have cancer!"

Again, the dumbass American public is seeing this as a parents' rights issue (same with the MMR vaccine), and not a "we the people are grateful that we can finally fight diseases that other governments around the world cannot afford to or can't be arsed to deal with in the midst of their military coups."

I know TL, DR, but that's sorta how I see it.

Almost all of the kids I grew up with had both measles and mumps, with some good old scarlet fever thrown in for good measure. Farm people just didn't go to the doctor then if they could help it. Granny had stuff she used.

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 04:30:20 PM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 04:20:40 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 03:06:13 PM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 02:25:37 AM
Jesus fucking christ.  I had measles and mumps as a kid. It meant two weeks off school each time. BFD.

Methinks, my dear Hawk, you were one of the lucky ones. 

And all your points about educating the public at large so that they don't inbreed, know proper hygeine and nutrition, know when to take advantage of FREE health care (in a large number of cases, vaccinations are free for MMR)...so very very valid.

To me, this all dovetails together into the same issue.  Education.

Those refusing the vaccine are sort of like those who believe in a flat earth.  Nice little belief in isolation, but really, where does it put you on the spectrum of reality?

At least one person didn't see what I was saying as criticism or being snarky, thank you Jenne.

:) 

My thinking is thus:  there's so many facets as to why the sort of reasoning  that vaccinations aren't necessary amongst those of a rich, 1st world country is badwrong...it's marking a time in our history where, despite having all facts pointing to its logic, folks are willing to take a stand against worldwide inoculation SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY CAN.

I think that's what it comes down to.

THEY DISLIKE BEING TOLD BY GOVERNMENT WHAT THEY SHOULD DO. 

It's why the HPV vaccine, which the CDC just recommended for boys even though  many pediatricians have been recommending it for them already since it came out, has had such a hard time getting traction.  Folks are thinking about the wrong end of the spectrum and telling themselves "I get my kid vaccinated, s/he'll think they can go out and fuck like bunnies."

Instead of the way the CDC is looking at it, which is: "We get these boys and girls vacc'd NOW, and 30-40 years down the line they won't have cancer!"

Again, the dumbass American public is seeing this as a parents' rights issue (same with the MMR vaccine), and not a "we the people are grateful that we can finally fight diseases that other governments around the world cannot afford to or can't be arsed to deal with in the midst of their military coups."

I know TL, DR, but that's sorta how I see it.

The irony being that a great many of these people are the same ones pushing for the government to tell other people what to do, as long as it's in line with their religious beliefs.

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 04:34:24 PM

Almost all of the kids I grew up with had both measles and mumps, with some good old scarlet fever thrown in for good measure. Farm people just didn't go to the doctor then if they could help it. Granny had stuff she used.

I'd wager that a lot of those communities saw things that we won't ever see again (like typhus, polio, etc.) because we live cleaner (despite every GFUCKINGD GOP'er thinking the EPA is a waste of taxpayer $) lives...

Country/folk remedies were used because the western medicine model has always been weak in the farm states...still is, if you want to know the truth--same with education.

I wouldn't want to go back to those times just because of the level of mutual understanding between strangers was just so very low...again, a deepening of experience that only happens when you 1) travel a lot or 2) get educated.  That, and women were basically treated like shit and minorities--forget about it.

Moving forward, and yes, I still believe we primates can move forward in some manner, the anit-vacc crowd represents self-actuation gone awry.  I want those middle class, white mothers (and I believe that's the demographic we're talking about, here) to take that initiative and do something HELPFUL and not WRONGFUL for society.  Fucking stage picket lines outside Congress for more library time/openings, write letters about the closures of parks...do something other than moving our hairless ape selves BACK through time...I don't want to ride a fucking dinosaur.

And I don't want my unborn child exposed to shit that mutated because some bitch was too uppity to get her kid a shot in the arm.

BACK IN THE GOOD OLD DAYS, MAN. MOTHERS DRANK AND SMOKED THROUGH THEIR PREGNANCIES AND KIDS NEVER WORE SEAT BELTS AND BABIES JUST RODE IN THEY MAMMA'S LAP, WE WOULD JUST RUN AROUND ALL DAY UNSUPERVISED AND SWIM IN THE RIVER AND WE ALL GOT MEASLES, MUMPS, RUBELLA, CHICKEN POX, SMALLPOX, YELLOW FEVER, DENGUE FEVER, AND MALARIA AND WE ALL TURNED OUT JUST FINE. NO BABIES WERE EVER LOW BIRTH WEIGHT OR STILLBORN AND NOBODY EVER DIED OF CONTUSIONS AFTER A CAR ACCIDENT AND THERE WAS NO SUCH THING AS CRIB DEATH AND NONE OF US EVER DROWNED OR WERE KIDNAPPED OR RAPED, THAT'S JUST THE WAY THINGS WERE BACK IN THE GOOD OLD DAYS WHEN PEOPLE WERE TOUGHER.

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 04:34:07 PM
I can kinda see that.

It does give me a vague idea of how to use conspiracy theory to maybe combat this. Such as put the idea out there that the anti-vaccine movement is part of the NWO agenda to reduce the human population without getting blood on its hands. Let the people choose to get sick and die sort of thing.

Well, there's speculation now that part of the HPV backlash is the cost of the drug...the drug companies have increased the prices of the vaccine...I can't imagine why this would be so...can you?  ...?

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 04:53:14 PM
BACK IN THE GOOD OLD DAYS, MAN. MOTHERS DRANK AND SMOKED THROUGH THEIR PREGNANCIES AND KIDS NEVER WORE SEAT BELTS AND BABIES JUST RODE IN THEY MAMMA'S LAP, WE WOULD JUST RUN AROUND ALL DAY UNSUPERVISED AND SWIM IN THE RIVER AND WE ALL GOT MEASLES, MUMPS, RUBELLA, CHICKEN POX, SMALLPOX, YELLOW FEVER, DENGUE FEVER, AND MALARIA AND WE ALL TURNED OUT JUST FINE. NO BABIES WERE EVER LOW BIRTH WEIGHT OR STILLBORN AND NOBODY EVER DIED OF CONTUSIONS AFTER A CAR ACCIDENT AND THERE WAS NO SUCH THING AS CRIB DEATH AND NONE OF US EVER DROWNED OR WERE KIDNAPPED OR RAPED, THAT'S JUST THE WAY THINGS WERE BACK IN THE GOOD OLD DAYS WHEN PEOPLE WERE TOUGHER.

I actually appreciate this point of view when we're talking about how far we've come and how far we still have to go.  Hawk's perspective--and Rog's when he waxes nostalgic--remind me of why we were inspired to invent, appreciate the culture we grew up in, and love the strength of personality that we get called down upon by other Westerners (that "rugged individualism" that's so loved and despised equally).

But I do not wish I was born in the past.  Nuh-uh.  And I am VERY fucking grateful to be born in So Cal, USandA.  For all its warts and spots...THIS is still a great time for a woman to be born in, and a fucking fabulous area to grow up and live in.  Sinkhole for culture, sometimes; fucked up beyond recognition in all things stable, perhaps--but no other time was any moreso, really.  You just had to have a lot of fucking luck and know-how to survive those times, in reality.

So while I see anti-vaccination crowds as brutally dishonest with themselves, I don't really see Hawk's viewpoint in the same light--just an example of "why panic?, the world goes on even after epidemics come through."  A lot of 3rd World occupants actually have the same outlook (my husband often espouses this "small potatoes" thing...over things I think deserve more passion of thought).  Those who've been through tough times over decades seem to often sorta go there...veterans of humanity, so to speak.

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 04:50:05 PM
I don't want to ride a fucking dinosaur.

Speak for yourself  :wink:

Twid,
needs a specialized saddle for a Stegosaurus.

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 05:09:24 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 04:50:05 PM
I don't want to ride a fucking dinosaur.

Speak for yourself  :wink:

Twid,
needs a specialized saddle for a Stegosaurus.

Jenne,

Is not a lunch.

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 05:10:20 PM

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 05:09:24 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 04:50:05 PM
I don't want to ride a fucking dinosaur.

Speak for yourself  :wink:

Twid,
needs a specialized saddle for a Stegosaurus.

Jenne,

Is not a lunch.

Twid,
Mentioned heavily armored herbivore for a reason
That and Stegs are cooler than T-Rexes.  :)

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 05:12:00 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 05:10:20 PM

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 05:09:24 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 04:50:05 PM
I don't want to ride a fucking dinosaur.

Speak for yourself  :wink:

Twid,
needs a specialized saddle for a Stegosaurus.

Jenne,

Is not a lunch.

Twid,
Mentioned heavily armored herbivore for a reason
That and Stegs are cooler than T-Rexes.  :)

Yeahbut...which ones you think some dumbass is going to wanna bring back?  The wusses you can ride or the fuckers that are badass and all?

Yeah, humans = dumbshits. 

           ^
           |
           |

POINT OF WHOLE THREAD RIGHT THERE.

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 05:15:52 PM

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 05:12:00 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 05:10:20 PM

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 05:09:24 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 04:50:05 PM
I don't want to ride a fucking dinosaur.

Speak for yourself  :wink:

Twid,
needs a specialized saddle for a Stegosaurus.

Jenne,

Is not a lunch.

Twid,
Mentioned heavily armored herbivore for a reason
That and Stegs are cooler than T-Rexes.  :)

Yeahbut...which ones you think some dumbass is going to wanna bring back?  The wusses you can ride or the fuckers that are badass and all?

Yeah, humans = dumbshits. 

           ^
           |
           |

POINT OF WHOLE THREAD RIGHT THERE.

:mittens:

Also, Coyote needs to womp me riding a Stegosaurus now.

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 05:18:28 PM
Also, Coyote needs to womp me riding a Stegosaurus now.

AGREED.  THIS MUST BE DONE.  FOR GREAT JUSTICE.

And you should be riding full armored and wielding a hugeass syringe.  Like 40 gauge.

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 05:19:38 PM

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 05:18:28 PM
Also, Coyote needs to womp me riding a Stegosaurus now.

AGREED.  THIS MUST BE DONE.  FOR GREAT JUSTICE.

And you should be riding full armored and wielding a hugeass syringe.  Like 40 gauge.

HURRY UP AND GET OFF DUTY PRIVATE!

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 05:18:28 PM
Also, Coyote needs to womp me riding a Stegosaurus now.

ok. you did ask.

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 05:04:06 PM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 04:53:14 PM
BACK IN THE GOOD OLD DAYS, MAN. MOTHERS DRANK AND SMOKED THROUGH THEIR PREGNANCIES AND KIDS NEVER WORE SEAT BELTS AND BABIES JUST RODE IN THEY MAMMA'S LAP, WE WOULD JUST RUN AROUND ALL DAY UNSUPERVISED AND SWIM IN THE RIVER AND WE ALL GOT MEASLES, MUMPS, RUBELLA, CHICKEN POX, SMALLPOX, YELLOW FEVER, DENGUE FEVER, AND MALARIA AND WE ALL TURNED OUT JUST FINE. NO BABIES WERE EVER LOW BIRTH WEIGHT OR STILLBORN AND NOBODY EVER DIED OF CONTUSIONS AFTER A CAR ACCIDENT AND THERE WAS NO SUCH THING AS CRIB DEATH AND NONE OF US EVER DROWNED OR WERE KIDNAPPED OR RAPED, THAT'S JUST THE WAY THINGS WERE BACK IN THE GOOD OLD DAYS WHEN PEOPLE WERE TOUGHER.

I actually appreciate this point of view when we're talking about how far we've come and how far we still have to go.  Hawk's perspective--and Rog's when he waxes nostalgic--remind me of why we were inspired to invent, appreciate the culture we grew up in, and love the strength of personality that we get called down upon by other Westerners (that "rugged individualism" that's so loved and despised equally).

But I do not wish I was born in the past.  Nuh-uh.  And I am VERY fucking grateful to be born in So Cal, USandA.  For all its warts and spots...THIS is still a great time for a woman to be born in, and a fucking fabulous area to grow up and live in.  Sinkhole for culture, sometimes; fucked up beyond recognition in all things stable, perhaps--but no other time was any moreso, really.  You just had to have a lot of fucking luck and know-how to survive those times, in reality.

So while I see anti-vaccination crowds as brutally dishonest with themselves, I don't really see Hawk's viewpoint in the same light--just an example of "why panic?, the world goes on even after epidemics come through."  A lot of 3rd World occupants actually have the same outlook (my husband often espouses this "small potatoes" thing...over things I think deserve more passion of thought).  Those who've been through tough times over decades seem to often sorta go there...veterans of humanity, so to speak.

None of the small things... the infections and cancers and fevers that are now preventable... are causes for mass panic, they aren't famine or war or tsunami. But they add up to a significantly improved quality of life and health. So, BFD, we'd only be looking at .3% mortality from unchecked measles. 1.6% from mumps, with an additional .1% with permanent hearing loss. Rubella has an extremely low mortality rate, but a very high complication rate including blindness, deafness, brain damage and disfigurement... and the mortality rate jumps to an astonishing 48% in unborn children whose mothers contract the disease. All three diseases can have long-term nervous system complications. Most deaths occur in infants under one year old. Back in the day women didn't just assume that their babies would survive their first year, or even make it through childbirth. That doesn't make it any less heartbreaking for women who lose their babies. I think a lot of these mortalities are simply off the radar even for people who grew up with it happening near them; kids might know that someone's baby died or was stillborn, but not make the connection to the cause. They might know that there's a retarded kid in school, but not realize that he's retarded due to brain damage from measles.

I don't really get the "No big deal" or Dawkins fallacy perspective. So a shit-ton of my friends are dead of things that they probably shouldn't be dead of... that doesn't mean I'm going to minimize the significance of people having the chance to avoid those kinds of deaths. Mumps and measles were still common when I was a kid... and it sucked ass.

Speaking of mental retardation; we just don't have retarded people like we used to. Back in the 1950's we had eugenic programs to round up and sterilize mentally retarded and mentally ill people, using dubious science and even more dubious ethics. Funny, isn't it, that vaccination turned out to be a far more effective preventative of mental retardation; most of the retarded people now are congenitally handicapped, rather than the result of encephalitis, a complication of mumps, measles, chicken pox, and rubella that used to be so common.

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 05:49:00 PM
Speaking of mental retardation; we just don't have retarded people like we used to. Back in the 1950's we had eugenic programs to round up and sterilize mentally retarded and mentally ill people, using dubious science and even more dubious ethics. Funny, isn't it, that vaccination turned out to be a far more effective preventative of mental retardation; most of the retarded people now are congenitally handicapped, rather than the result of encephalitis, a complication of mumps, measles, chicken pox, and rubella that used to be so common.

WE don't...but 3rd World countries do.  WE don't have dwarves and folks born without limbs, etc. as much as we used to as well.

No, I agree with what you're saying...about the "yesteryears" because like I said--everything IS, indeed, BETTER than it was, for those living HERE, than it was back in the day.  I don't want to return to a time of more ignorance and less acceptance, less hygeine and more disease.  I think that's ludicrous.

I was just saying I appreciate a viewpoint that takes things in measures of time beyond my OWN scope is all.  It doesn't mean what's important to me is less so, just means that a broader timeline and perspective can deepen my acknowledgement of that importance...to me.  Again, I live with someone that doesn't see most things that I feel are important in small scale are even RETRIEVABLE for the care cup--in fact, he is rather adamant about certain things that would surprise and shock the average Westerner as being close to important because he IS so very big picture (and that truly can be HIS failing, imho).

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 06:06:00 PM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 05:49:00 PM
Speaking of mental retardation; we just don't have retarded people like we used to. Back in the 1950's we had eugenic programs to round up and sterilize mentally retarded and mentally ill people, using dubious science and even more dubious ethics. Funny, isn't it, that vaccination turned out to be a far more effective preventative of mental retardation; most of the retarded people now are congenitally handicapped, rather than the result of encephalitis, a complication of mumps, measles, chicken pox, and rubella that used to be so common.

WE don't...but 3rd World countries do.  WE don't have dwarves and folks born without limbs, etc. as much as we used to as well.

No, I agree with what you're saying...about the "yesteryears" because like I said--everything IS, indeed, BETTER than it was, for those living HERE, than it was back in the day.  I don't want to return to a time of more ignorance and less acceptance, less hygeine and more disease.  I think that's ludicrous.

I was just saying I appreciate a viewpoint that takes things in measures of time beyond my OWN scope is all.  It doesn't mean what's important to me is less so, just means that a broader timeline and perspective can deepen my acknowledgement of that importance...to me.  Again, I live with someone that doesn't see most things that I feel are important in small scale are even RETRIEVABLE for the care cup--in fact, he is rather adamant about certain things that would surprise and shock the average Westerner as being close to important because he IS so very big picture (and that truly can be HIS failing, imho).

Yes, you can pretty much go to any 3rd world country and see what good hygiene, nutrition and medical care do for the human condition. I certainly wouldn't want to live in one... nor have been born 60 years earlier, either. Hopefully we can keep moving forward in providing more of these things for more people.

I appreciate hearing different viewpoints, but I will mock them if they're totally stupid. :) I find the "Why, when I was a kid we had polio, rocky mountain spotted fever, and spinal meningitis all rolled into one... half of us survived, I don't see what the big deal is" rhetoric painfully similar to the hipster malaise of refusing to be shocked or disturbed by anything. Being jaded and desensitized to suffering isn't a virtue.

I remember when I was a stupid teenager and had a thing for the Middle Ages, and told my chemistry teacher I was born in the wrong era. He told me flat out I probably would have died. He was right. Most certainly I would have been considered blind.

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 06:21:09 PM
I appreciate hearing different viewpoints, but I will mock them if they're totally stupid. :) I find the "Why, when I was a kid we had polio, rocky mountain spotted fever, and spinal meningitis all rolled into one... half of us survived, I don't see what the big deal is" rhetoric painfully similar to the hipster malaise of refusing to be shocked or disturbed by anything. Being jaded and desensitized to suffering isn't a virtue.

Polio, as mentioned earlier, is a soft spot for me.

My recently deceased grandmother is the one that got polio. Her paralysis from the waist down is the reason my father, an Irish Catholic, is the reason I am the only son of an only son.

I for one, am very glad that I had my fair share of poking with needles as a child. My dad described measles and mumps to me, as he was from the generation that had them, but, he was also from the generation in which the polio vaccine wasn't foolproof, and it backfired. I'm pretty sure I've mentioned on the board before that he has no muscles from his right hip down, as they had to be removed in the 60s and 70s to stop them from rotting from the inside out. Although our technology is better now, I couldn't imagine going through the amount of surgeries he did. He spent most of his childhood in the hospital, with a scary metal brace on his leg, on crutches or in wheelchairs.

The fact that they aren't giving that vaccine much anymore scares me, and it scares him too. The first thing he said at the minute I was born was, "How is her legs? Look at her legs!" and the doctor was like, "Huh?" My dad didn't realize that polio wasn't hereditary, but he was so scarred by his childhood that he feared for my own.

Resurgences of any of these diseases would be catastrophic. It's bad enough that shit like tuberculosis is becoming drug resistant, we don't need people waiving shots for their kids thinking it's going to make them deformed and handicapped. My father *IS* deformed and handicapped. Ask him what he thinks.

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 06:21:09 PM
I appreciate hearing different viewpoints, but I will mock them if they're totally stupid. :) I find the "Why, when I was a kid we had polio, rocky mountain spotted fever, and spinal meningitis all rolled into one... half of us survived, I don't see what the big deal is" rhetoric painfully similar to the hipster malaise of refusing to be shocked or disturbed by anything. Being jaded and desensitized to suffering isn't a virtue.

I agree to that last...I'm not sure Hawk meant to imply that, but he can speak for himself.

I think my own husband has some issues in that aspect, that he has a litmus for "true suffering" that really makes me cringe.  Because like I said in another thread--how can we categorize anyone else's suffering other than our own?  It's a sketchy business at best.

Quote from: Suu on October 27, 2011, 06:26:21 PM
I for one, am very glad that I had my fair share of poking with needles as a child. My dad described measles and mumps to me, as he was from the generation that had them, but, he was also from the generation in which the polio vaccine wasn't foolproof, and it backfired. I'm pretty sure I've mentioned on the board before that he has no muscles from his right hip down, as they had to be removed in the 60s and 70s to stop them from rotting from the inside out. Although our technology is better now, I couldn't imagine going through the amount of surgeries he did. He spent most of his childhood in the hospital, with a scary metal brace on his leg, on crutches or in wheelchairs.

The fact that they aren't giving that vaccine much anymore scares me, and it scares him too. The first thing he said at the minute I was born was, "How is her legs? Look at her legs!" and the doctor was like, "Huh?" My dad didn't realize that polio wasn't hereditary, but he was so scarred by his childhood that he feared for my own.

Resurgences of any of these diseases would be catastrophic. It's bad enough that shit like tuberculosis is becoming drug resistant, we don't need people waiving shots for their kids thinking it's going to make them deformed and handicapped. My father *IS* deformed and handicapped. Ask him what he thinks.

:hugs:

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 06:32:02 PM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 06:21:09 PM
I appreciate hearing different viewpoints, but I will mock them if they're totally stupid. :) I find the "Why, when I was a kid we had polio, rocky mountain spotted fever, and spinal meningitis all rolled into one... half of us survived, I don't see what the big deal is" rhetoric painfully similar to the hipster malaise of refusing to be shocked or disturbed by anything. Being jaded and desensitized to suffering isn't a virtue.

I agree to that last...I'm not sure Hawk meant to imply that, but he can speak for himself.

I think my own husband has some issues in that aspect, that he has a litmus for "true suffering" that really makes me cringe.  Because like I said in another thread--how can we categorize anyone else's suffering other than our own?  It's a sketchy business at best.

That's the Dawkins fallacy at work.

Human suffering is human suffering. It doesn't matter to what degree. If it is suffering, it is suffering.

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 06:32:29 PM

Quote from: Suu on October 27, 2011, 06:26:21 PM
I for one, am very glad that I had my fair share of poking with needles as a child. My dad described measles and mumps to me, as he was from the generation that had them, but, he was also from the generation in which the polio vaccine wasn't foolproof, and it backfired. I'm pretty sure I've mentioned on the board before that he has no muscles from his right hip down, as they had to be removed in the 60s and 70s to stop them from rotting from the inside out. Although our technology is better now, I couldn't imagine going through the amount of surgeries he did. He spent most of his childhood in the hospital, with a scary metal brace on his leg, on crutches or in wheelchairs.

The fact that they aren't giving that vaccine much anymore scares me, and it scares him too. The first thing he said at the minute I was born was, "How is her legs? Look at her legs!" and the doctor was like, "Huh?" My dad didn't realize that polio wasn't hereditary, but he was so scarred by his childhood that he feared for my own.

Resurgences of any of these diseases would be catastrophic. It's bad enough that shit like tuberculosis is becoming drug resistant, we don't need people waiving shots for their kids thinking it's going to make them deformed and handicapped. My father *IS* deformed and handicapped. Ask him what he thinks.

:hugs:

It's cool. He has epic scars on his legs from the 1960s sutures. I can't tell you how many times we went to the beach and he'd get asked what happened by a little kid. The story was always a shark bite or alligator attack.  :lulz:

He walks, too...well...sorta. He wobbles. My sister calls him the Gimpy Bastard.

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 04:11:03 PM

Quote from: Cain on October 27, 2011, 04:03:47 PM
More to the point, telling people they are retarded for their beliefs doesn't actually shame them into thinking about it and perhaps abandoning their faith, if anything, it tends to make them more obstinate in their beliefs.

If you're looking to actually make people more secular and more rational in their daily lives, castigating them for being a dumb motherfucker isn't really going to work now, is it?

Exactly this. What they accomplish, other than smug self-satisfaction over embracing an identity that amounts to approximately the same degree of usefulness as refusing to believe that Skeletor rules the dark side of the moon, is to reinforce (and then patrol with guns) the border between religious and non-religious people. They serve exactly the same function as racists and homophobes, and I wonder whether, without the Dawkins-era atheists poking at them, Christian Fundamentalists would still feel so threatened that they would be pushing for their agendas to be heard in public schools? One is surely a reaction to the other, and the two opposing forces must, by nature, escalate in response to each other.

So, then atheists are strictly better than Satanists because they have BOTH the smug satisfaction AND they believe in a dark Sky Daddy? :)

Quote from: Suu on October 27, 2011, 06:39:43 PM

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 06:32:29 PM

Quote from: Suu on October 27, 2011, 06:26:21 PM
I for one, am very glad that I had my fair share of poking with needles as a child. My dad described measles and mumps to me, as he was from the generation that had them, but, he was also from the generation in which the polio vaccine wasn't foolproof, and it backfired. I'm pretty sure I've mentioned on the board before that he has no muscles from his right hip down, as they had to be removed in the 60s and 70s to stop them from rotting from the inside out. Although our technology is better now, I couldn't imagine going through the amount of surgeries he did. He spent most of his childhood in the hospital, with a scary metal brace on his leg, on crutches or in wheelchairs.

The fact that they aren't giving that vaccine much anymore scares me, and it scares him too. The first thing he said at the minute I was born was, "How is her legs? Look at her legs!" and the doctor was like, "Huh?" My dad didn't realize that polio wasn't hereditary, but he was so scarred by his childhood that he feared for my own.

Resurgences of any of these diseases would be catastrophic. It's bad enough that shit like tuberculosis is becoming drug resistant, we don't need people waiving shots for their kids thinking it's going to make them deformed and handicapped. My father *IS* deformed and handicapped. Ask him what he thinks.

:hugs:

It's cool. He has epic scars on his legs from the 1960s sutures. I can't tell you how many times we went to the beach and he'd get asked what happened by a little kid. The story was always a shark bite or alligator attack.  :lulz:

He walks, too...well...sorta. He wobbles. My sister calls him the Gimpy Bastard.

Grandma never walked again. Polio sucks. She was wheelchair bound from 1955 to 2009 at which point she remained in a hospital.

Quote from: Triple Zero on October 27, 2011, 06:44:33 PM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 04:11:03 PM

Quote from: Cain on October 27, 2011, 04:03:47 PM
More to the point, telling people they are retarded for their beliefs doesn't actually shame them into thinking about it and perhaps abandoning their faith, if anything, it tends to make them more obstinate in their beliefs.

If you're looking to actually make people more secular and more rational in their daily lives, castigating them for being a dumb motherfucker isn't really going to work now, is it?

Exactly this. What they accomplish, other than smug self-satisfaction over embracing an identity that amounts to approximately the same degree of usefulness as refusing to believe that Skeletor rules the dark side of the moon, is to reinforce (and then patrol with guns) the border between religious and non-religious people. They serve exactly the same function as racists and homophobes, and I wonder whether, without the Dawkins-era atheists poking at them, Christian Fundamentalists would still feel so threatened that they would be pushing for their agendas to be heard in public schools? One is surely a reaction to the other, and the two opposing forces must, by nature, escalate in response to each other.

So, then atheists are strictly better than Satanists because they have BOTH the smug satisfaction AND they believe in a dark Sky Daddy? :)

Depends on type of Satanist. LaVeyans tend to be atheists. ;)

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 06:34:15 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 06:32:02 PM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 06:21:09 PM
I appreciate hearing different viewpoints, but I will mock them if they're totally stupid. :) I find the "Why, when I was a kid we had polio, rocky mountain spotted fever, and spinal meningitis all rolled into one... half of us survived, I don't see what the big deal is" rhetoric painfully similar to the hipster malaise of refusing to be shocked or disturbed by anything. Being jaded and desensitized to suffering isn't a virtue.

I agree to that last...I'm not sure Hawk meant to imply that, but he can speak for himself.

I think my own husband has some issues in that aspect, that he has a litmus for "true suffering" that really makes me cringe.  Because like I said in another thread--how can we categorize anyone else's suffering other than our own?  It's a sketchy business at best.

That's the Dawkins fallacy at work.

Human suffering is human suffering. It doesn't matter to what degree. If it is suffering, it is suffering.

I have to confess I'm a judgemental bitch, and sometimes I fall into that fallacy myself with a WHOMP!  (notice the "H" there...)

But yeah...it's a difficult proposition at best, isn't it? 

And Suu, I second Twid's hugs...I can only imagine your dad's suffering...glad he's been so successful in life in spite of it, though!

Ahem.

FUCK YOU, MY DAD DIED FROM MEASLES.

Thank you.  You may continue.

I'm pretty sure I got both mumps and measles when I was young too, btw. Isn't that the point, as long as you get them while you're young it's not as bad? And I guess that's what the vaccine is for, so you can get it without really getting totally ill.

Though I really can't remember how crappy it was because I was really young.

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 06:44:58 PM

Quote from: Suu on October 27, 2011, 06:39:43 PM

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 06:32:29 PM

Quote from: Suu on October 27, 2011, 06:26:21 PM
I for one, am very glad that I had my fair share of poking with needles as a child. My dad described measles and mumps to me, as he was from the generation that had them, but, he was also from the generation in which the polio vaccine wasn't foolproof, and it backfired. I'm pretty sure I've mentioned on the board before that he has no muscles from his right hip down, as they had to be removed in the 60s and 70s to stop them from rotting from the inside out. Although our technology is better now, I couldn't imagine going through the amount of surgeries he did. He spent most of his childhood in the hospital, with a scary metal brace on his leg, on crutches or in wheelchairs.

The fact that they aren't giving that vaccine much anymore scares me, and it scares him too. The first thing he said at the minute I was born was, "How is her legs? Look at her legs!" and the doctor was like, "Huh?" My dad didn't realize that polio wasn't hereditary, but he was so scarred by his childhood that he feared for my own.

Resurgences of any of these diseases would be catastrophic. It's bad enough that shit like tuberculosis is becoming drug resistant, we don't need people waiving shots for their kids thinking it's going to make them deformed and handicapped. My father *IS* deformed and handicapped. Ask him what he thinks.

:hugs:

It's cool. He has epic scars on his legs from the 1960s sutures. I can't tell you how many times we went to the beach and he'd get asked what happened by a little kid. The story was always a shark bite or alligator attack.  :lulz:

He walks, too...well...sorta. He wobbles. My sister calls him the Gimpy Bastard.

Grandma never walked again. Polio sucks. She was wheelchair bound from 1955 to 2009 at which point she remained in a hospital.

I'm not 100% sure, but from what I understand the treatments my father underwent were pretty revolutionary at the time, which probably saved him in the long run. Not that long ago they had a special on TV in which folks that had suffered from Polio in the 50s were having severe complications now. My dad get's check ups regularly, but since the infected tissue was removed, he has little issues other than, well, not being able to walk normally. He can ride a bike and drive a car, he was just trained to do so with his left leg. He was also a high school wrestler once all of the surgeries had been completed and he could function without the brace.

He does, however, now that's he's in his 50s, use his handicap as a crutch, which get's fucking annoying at times.

Quote from: Triple Zero on October 27, 2011, 06:51:50 PM
I'm pretty sure I got both mumps and measles when I was young too, btw. Isn't that the point, as long as you get them while you're young it's not as bad? And I guess that's what the vaccine is for, so you can get it without really getting totally ill.

Though I really can't remember how crappy it was because I was really young.

As long as you wanna risk encephalitis, pneumonia and thrombocytopenia...that's with measles alone.  Again, 000, you were one of the lucky ones.

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 07:01:03 PM

Quote from: Triple Zero on October 27, 2011, 06:51:50 PM
I'm pretty sure I got both mumps and measles when I was young too, btw. Isn't that the point, as long as you get them while you're young it's not as bad? And I guess that's what the vaccine is for, so you can get it without really getting totally ill.

Though I really can't remember how crappy it was because I was really young.

As long as you wanna risk encephalitis, pneumonia and thrombocytopenia...that's with measles alone.  Again, 000, you were one of the lucky ones.

Worst I ever got was chicken pox.

Twid,
happy about that.

I have to admit I'm not a huge fan of the chickenpox vaccine, though. It seems less effective than contracting the disease and you have to get regular boosters. Granted, I had an epic case of the pox when I was 5, and when the nurse last year saw my titer test, she was like...damn, you had the disease, huh?

I know that it's not so much as as the chickenpox that's scary, but the side effects. Obviously you'll be susceptible to getting shingles when you're older since, because varicella is a form of herp-a-derp, it never leaves your body, but contracting true chickenpox as an adult is fucking scary once the shots wear off. I wasn't thrilled with having to get that fucking DTaP and the Hep B series, myself, but I still did it. I'd much rather get chickenpox again than Hep B.  :kingmeh:

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 07:03:12 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 07:01:03 PM

Quote from: Triple Zero on October 27, 2011, 06:51:50 PM
I'm pretty sure I got both mumps and measles when I was young too, btw. Isn't that the point, as long as you get them while you're young it's not as bad? And I guess that's what the vaccine is for, so you can get it without really getting totally ill.

Though I really can't remember how crappy it was because I was really young.

As long as you wanna risk encephalitis, pneumonia and thrombocytopenia...that's with measles alone.  Again, 000, you were one of the lucky ones.

Worst I ever got was chicken pox.

Twid,
happy about that.

I got it too--that was before the vaccination, though.  My kids are vaccinated against it.  Though I know folks who were vacc'd against it and still got it, or those who HAD it and got it again, and now they get shingles every once in a while.  Shingles outbreaks suck, they're like herpes outbreaks.

Side effects of chicken pox, btw, can be skin infections (from scratching), pnemonia, encephalitis and ataxia.

Suu and I--posting SS at the ST. (same time)

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 07:06:56 PM

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 07:03:12 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 07:01:03 PM

Quote from: Triple Zero on October 27, 2011, 06:51:50 PM
I'm pretty sure I got both mumps and measles when I was young too, btw. Isn't that the point, as long as you get them while you're young it's not as bad? And I guess that's what the vaccine is for, so you can get it without really getting totally ill.

Though I really can't remember how crappy it was because I was really young.

As long as you wanna risk encephalitis, pneumonia and thrombocytopenia...that's with measles alone.  Again, 000, you were one of the lucky ones.

Worst I ever got was chicken pox.

Twid,
happy about that.

I got it too--that was before the vaccination, though.  My kids are vaccinated against it.  Though I know folks who were vacc'd against it and still got it, or those who HAD it and got it again, and now they get shingles every once in a while.  Shingles outbreaks suck, they're like herpes outbreaks.

Side effects of chicken pox, btw, can be skin infections (from scratching), pnemonia, encephalitis and ataxia.

I'm 30, so I didn't get the vaccine either. Sounded like a dream at first. No school for a week or two, but goddamn, the itching. And the smell. I'll never forget that smell.

I was 6...and don't remember a smell.  What SMELL you talkin' about?

Never mind.  :lulz:  Some things should probably be left undescribed!

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 07:11:41 PM
I was 6...and don't remember a smell.  What SMELL you talkin' about?

Never mind.  :lulz:  Some things should probably be left undescribed!

How your skin smells after day 3 or 4. There is a noticeable change.

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 05:09:24 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 04:50:05 PM
I don't want to ride a fucking dinosaur.

Speak for yourself  :wink:

Twid,
needs a specialized saddle for a Stegosaurus.

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 05:18:28 PM
Also, Coyote needs to womp me riding a Stegosaurus now.

(http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ltql9vMjgt1r5ncgho1_500.png)

 :lulz:

I like how you keep putting me in a stillsuit.

:lulz:  :mittens: 

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 07:16:12 PM
I like how you keep putting me in a stillsuit.

You owe me for NOT giving her boobies.

And you are wearing a kilt.

Quote from: Donald Coyote on October 27, 2011, 07:18:31 PM

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 07:16:12 PM
I like how you keep putting me in a stillsuit.

You owe me for NOT giving her boobies.

And you are wearing a kilt.

Well, yeah, Stegosauruses can hear a zipper a mile away....

I just remember how my parents were THRILLED. It was like...an important rite of passage! I have an epic scar on my nose too. I woke up and my mom saw something on my face and scratched it off. I went to school and I just remember feeling kinda blah and dizzy all day...Then I got off the bus and went. "Mom, I'm not feeling good."

She pulled my shirt off of me, I looked down, saw 2-3 blisters and I screamed as I was carried off to the bathroom and thrown in a warm bath. I watched the blisters spread...it was scary as hell for a 5 year old. I swear my parents were high-fiving behind my back and put my brother in every room I was in, but my sister caught them first...she was 6 months old. My brother had the worst rash on his back. The kid was COVERED. My mom has pictures of us. I have no idea WHY, but there's pictures of us in our pox glory in an album somewhere. Then when we scabbed over, my parents took us to the beach and told us to get in the water. The saltwater pulled them right off and we healed clean.

We did that a lot, come to think of it. Every time one of us had poison ivy, or when we all got scarlet fever (THAT WAS A FUN CHRISTMAS), or when I had hives...go to the beach, get in the water. The Gulf of Mexico cures all skin funk.  :lulz:

Oh holy hell, now we have dinosaur raep in 2 threads.  :lulz:

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 07:01:03 PM

Quote from: Triple Zero on October 27, 2011, 06:51:50 PM
I'm pretty sure I got both mumps and measles when I was young too, btw. Isn't that the point, as long as you get them while you're young it's not as bad? And I guess that's what the vaccine is for, so you can get it without really getting totally ill.

Though I really can't remember how crappy it was because I was really young.

As long as you wanna risk encephalitis, pneumonia and thrombocytopenia...that's with measles alone.  Again, 000, you were one of the lucky ones.

Checking up, I'm not sure if I got measles btw. I'm sure I had mumps, though, but Wikipedia says it's relatively harmless, as long as there's no complications. Maybe I'm just one of the lucky ones because of our healthcare system?

Mumps vaccination was introduced in 1987 in the Netherlands, I'm guessing I already had had it by then. Cause it was for kids 14 months and kids 9 years old, and I was born in 1980.

Quote from: Triple Zero on October 27, 2011, 07:29:53 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 07:01:03 PM

Quote from: Triple Zero on October 27, 2011, 06:51:50 PM
I'm pretty sure I got both mumps and measles when I was young too, btw. Isn't that the point, as long as you get them while you're young it's not as bad? And I guess that's what the vaccine is for, so you can get it without really getting totally ill.

Though I really can't remember how crappy it was because I was really young.

As long as you wanna risk encephalitis, pneumonia and thrombocytopenia...that's with measles alone.  Again, 000, you were one of the lucky ones.

Checking up, I'm not sure if I got measles btw. I'm sure I had mumps, though, but Wikipedia says it's relatively harmless, as long as there's no complications. Maybe I'm just one of the lucky ones because of our healthcare system?

Mumps vaccination was introduced in 1987 in the Netherlands, I'm guessing I already had had it by then. Cause it was for kids 14 months and kids 9 years old, and I was born in 1980.

Health care, your level of caretaking at home by your family, good nutrition and genetic wheel of fortune--I think those are what help kids survive these diseases without complications that alter the course of their lives forever.

It's a good thing smallpox was eradicated 40 years ago. I'd be scared to think what would happen in 3rd world countries today with the population they have if that ever came back. Could you survive it? Sure...but you wouldn't be pretty.

Quote from: Suu on October 27, 2011, 07:25:53 PM
Oh holy hell, now we have dinosaur raep in 2 threads.  :lulz:

Number 4:

http://www.cracked.com/article_17626_the-5-creepiest-sex-scenes-in-comics.html

Quote from: Suu on October 27, 2011, 07:46:27 PM
It's a good thing smallpox was eradicated 40 years ago. I'd be scared to think what would happen in 3rd world countries today with the population they have if that ever came back. Could you survive it? Sure...but you wouldn't be pretty.

Literally:
http://www.google.com/search?q=smallpox&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&oe=UTF-8&rlz=1I7SNNT_enUS376US376&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&biw=877&bih=564

(don't click, it's seriously not pretty)

Quote from: Suu on October 27, 2011, 07:04:18 PM
I have to admit I'm not a huge fan of the chickenpox vaccine, though. It seems less effective than contracting the disease and you have to get regular boosters. Granted, I had an epic case of the pox when I was 5, and when the nurse last year saw my titer test, she was like...damn, you had the disease, huh?

I know that it's not so much as as the chickenpox that's scary, but the side effects. Obviously you'll be susceptible to getting shingles when you're older since, because varicella is a form of herp-a-derp, it never leaves your body, but contracting true chickenpox as an adult is fucking scary once the shots wear off. I wasn't thrilled with having to get that fucking DTaP and the Hep B series, myself, but I still did it. I'd much rather get chickenpox again than Hep B.  :kingmeh:

You just get a booster every seven years, it's no scarier than getting a tetanus shot every ten years. It's a cheap fuckin shot, too.

I've known several people who didn't get chicken pox as a kid, before there was a vaccine. It's WRETCHED to have as an adult. I feel lucky there is a vaccine now, because I never had it when I was a kid and I had no immunity, despite being around tons of kids who got it.

Kind of glad that people are prettier now, too, due to not having fucked-up pox scarred skin.

You sound like my mom. Obviously she had 3 kids who had full blown chickenpox within a month's time in 1988...and she's never had it. I wonder if it's like mono in the effect that you can get it, and not be symptomatic.

Quote from: Triple Zero on October 27, 2011, 07:29:53 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 07:01:03 PM

Quote from: Triple Zero on October 27, 2011, 06:51:50 PM
I'm pretty sure I got both mumps and measles when I was young too, btw. Isn't that the point, as long as you get them while you're young it's not as bad? And I guess that's what the vaccine is for, so you can get it without really getting totally ill.

Though I really can't remember how crappy it was because I was really young.

As long as you wanna risk encephalitis, pneumonia and thrombocytopenia...that's with measles alone.  Again, 000, you were one of the lucky ones.

Checking up, I'm not sure if I got measles btw. I'm sure I had mumps, though, but Wikipedia says it's relatively harmless, as long as there's no complications. Maybe I'm just one of the lucky ones because of our healthcare system?

Mumps vaccination was introduced in 1987 in the Netherlands, I'm guessing I already had had it by then. Cause it was for kids 14 months and kids 9 years old, and I was born in 1980.

"relatively harmless, as long as there are no complications"  :lulz: but isn't that true of any disease? HIV is relatively harmless, as long as there are  no complications... it's the complications that get you.

The problem with mumps is that the complications were fatal in 1.6% of all cases.

Quote from: Suu on October 27, 2011, 08:04:09 PM
You sound like my mom. Obviously she had 3 kids who had full blown chickenpox within a month's time in 1988...and she's never had it. I wonder if it's like mono in the effect that you can get it, and not be symptomatic.

It can be, but I had no antibodies so my doctor vaccinated me.

I got vaccinated for Rubella in my twenties, and for mumps and measles in the late '70's. My sisters missed the measles and mumps vaccines, but got vaccinated for smallpox, which I missed by I think one year.

The cold has complications too. It's called pneumonia or bronchitis.  Yet there is no shot for rhinovirus, just influenza. I know there's a shit ton of rhinoviri strains, but there's also a shit ton of influenza too, and they just pick and choose which one they think will be more prevalent in the "season". You can catch the flu at any time of the year, same with a cold.

I can shake a cold in a day. The flu, however, will lay me out for a week. I need to get a flu shot this year, I can feel it's going to be a sick winter for me for some reason.

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 08:06:49 PM

Quote from: Suu on October 27, 2011, 08:04:09 PM
You sound like my mom. Obviously she had 3 kids who had full blown chickenpox within a month's time in 1988...and she's never had it. I wonder if it's like mono in the effect that you can get it, and not be symptomatic.

It can be, but I had no antibodies so my doctor vaccinated me.

I got vaccinated for Rubella in my twenties, and for mumps and measles in the late '70's. My sisters missed the measles and mumps vaccines, but got vaccinated for smallpox, which I missed by I think one year.

Sounds like you came in right at the onset of the MMR. I was born in 1982 and I definitely had the MMR. I didn't have smallpox. I think that was officially done in 75. But chickenpox is a relatively new vaccine so naturally I would have had to have the disease. I've got one tiny scar on my face, and that's it. I definitely had polio several times, and TB. I just had Hep B because they didn't start enforcing that for school kids until I was already in high school so I missed that shot series. Now they're just giving it to infants.

Because of the immigrant population, I know they had to reintroduce pertussis to the DTaP, which made my arm swell like a bitch last year, but at least I'm good for another 9 years. I really hate that fucking shot.

They've changed vaccines so much in my lifetime that I was caught in some sort of limbo, hence the titer test last year. They had no idea where I stood. Two vials of blood, 4 shots, and a no lollipops later, I finally got caught up.

Smallpox ended before '73, because that's when I was born, and I didn't get it.  I think it ended near 70 or 71, actually.

ETA:  '71:

1971 was the year in which the Surgeon General of the United States Public Health Service, the Redbook Committee of the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Territorial Health Officers agreed that the time had come to discontinue routine primary smallpox vaccination for American children. As a result of this it may also be expected that school vaccination laws presently in effect in some 28 states will soon be repealed or will not be enforced with vigor.

From http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/49/4/489

ETA:  So that means '72 is probably the very last year to get them, and my aunt born in '72 didn't get one...so that's that.

When I was a kid the measles and mumps were separate shots, no rubella. I got the measles shot first and then the mumps shot later, twice: I had to have two different vaccines because the first vaccine was only something like 70% effective.

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 08:28:00 PM
Smallpox ended before '73, because that's when I was born, and I didn't get it.  I think it ended near 70 or 71, actually.

ETA:  '71:

1971 was the year in which the Surgeon General of the United States Public Health Service, the Redbook Committee of the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Territorial Health Officers agreed that the time had come to discontinue routine primary smallpox vaccination for American children. As a result of this it may also be expected that school vaccination laws presently in effect in some 28 states will soon be repealed or will not be enforced with vigor.

From http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/49/4/489

I was born in '71, so that makes sense.

The main reason there's no rhinovirus vaccine is that it mutates too fast for a vaccine to ever be effective... faster than influenza.

If they ever come out with an easily-communicable/mutatable antivirus, I'd like it to be ROTOVIRUS before it's RHINO.

Just saying.

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 08:32:31 PM
If they ever come out with an easily-communicable/mutatable antivirus, I'd like it to be ROTOVIRUS before it's RHINO.

Just saying.

Oh dude, no shit. Poor diarrhea babies. :(

Troof.

And now they're talking about hitting girls with the HPV vaccine earlier now on a mandatory basis. I watch 20 somethings cry with that, I have no idea how a 9 year old will take it. My sister HATES it...though it's too late now for her too as she's been diagnosed with a high-risk strain of it, so I can see the importance of getting them vaccinated earlier.

Quote from: Suu on October 27, 2011, 08:57:41 PM
Troof.

And now they're talking about hitting girls with the HPV vaccine earlier now on a mandatory basis. I watch 20 somethings cry with that, I have no idea how a 9 year old will take it. My sister HATES it...though it's too late now for her too as she's been diagnosed with a high-risk strain of it, so I can see the importance of getting them vaccinated earlier.

If the shot hurts like a motherfucker, get it done before you're 4. After that you'll just remember how painful some inoculations can be.

My daughter said it was no big deal. She might just have a really high pain tolerance though.

Apparently it burns. You can feel the suspension enter your system and burn down the length of your arm. That's the story I've gotten from most people I've asked. I was already too old for it by the time it came out, and well, it was too late anyway.

I'll have to take my sons to get it.

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 09:39:20 PM
I'll have to take my sons to get it.

Likewise, once I have them.

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 09:42:00 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 09:39:20 PM
I'll have to take my sons to get it.

Likewise, once I have them.

horse~>cart, my friend.  :lulz:

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 09:43:53 PM

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 09:42:00 PM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 09:39:20 PM
I'll have to take my sons to get it.

Likewise, once I have them.

horse~>cart, my friend.  :lulz:

I'm an eye to the future sort of guy  :lulz:

Please do, guys. I would hate for your kids to go through what I'm going through right now. :(

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 07:34:16 PM
Health care, your level of caretaking at home by your family

I was with my grandma :D is all I remember about the mumps episode :D

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 08:04:36 PM
"relatively harmless, as long as there are no complications"  :lulz: but isn't that true of any disease?

Well that's what the wikipedium said. I'm just wondering why my parents didn't seem to make a big deal out of it. But then, they don't tell me everything, so who knows maybe they were worried shitless.

QuoteHIV is relatively harmless, as long as there are  no complications... it's the complications that get you.

That's a bit of a nonsense argument, because it also holds for the common cold.

QuoteThe problem with mumps is that the complications were fatal in 1.6% of all cases.

I saw that number too, that's quite hefty, so maybe my parents were worries shitless but just never told me.

Quote from: Triple Zero on October 28, 2011, 12:07:00 AM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 07:34:16 PM
Health care, your level of caretaking at home by your family

I was with my grandma :D is all I remember about the mumps episode :D

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 08:04:36 PM
"relatively harmless, as long as there are no complications"  :lulz: but isn't that true of any disease?

Well that's what the wikipedium said. I'm just wondering why my parents didn't seem to make a big deal out of it. But then, they don't tell me everything, so who knows maybe they were worried shitless.

QuoteHIV is relatively harmless, as long as there are  no complications... it's the complications that get you.

That's a bit of a nonsense argument, because it also holds for the common cold.

QuoteThe problem with mumps is that the complications were fatal in 1.6% of all cases.

I saw that number too, that's quite hefty, so maybe my parents were worries shitless but just never told me.

Yes, the bit about the complications was tongue-in-cheek, because of course most viruses are relatively harmless as long as there are no complications... Go, Wikipedia!

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 04:53:14 PM
BACK IN THE GOOD OLD DAYS, MAN. MOTHERS DRANK AND SMOKED THROUGH THEIR PREGNANCIES AND KIDS NEVER WORE SEAT BELTS AND BABIES JUST RODE IN THEY MAMMA'S LAP, WE WOULD JUST RUN AROUND ALL DAY UNSUPERVISED AND SWIM IN THE RIVER AND WE ALL GOT MEASLES, MUMPS, RUBELLA, CHICKEN POX, SMALLPOX, YELLOW FEVER, DENGUE FEVER, AND MALARIA AND WE ALL TURNED OUT JUST FINE. NO BABIES WERE EVER LOW BIRTH WEIGHT OR STILLBORN AND NOBODY EVER DIED OF CONTUSIONS AFTER A CAR ACCIDENT AND THERE WAS NO SUCH THING AS CRIB DEATH AND NONE OF US EVER DROWNED OR WERE KIDNAPPED OR RAPED, THAT'S JUST THE WAY THINGS WERE BACK IN THE GOOD OLD DAYS WHEN PEOPLE WERE TOUGHER.

HERE'S A THOUGHT, GO FUCK YOURSELF BITCH. In the future, if I post anything that offends you...GOOD.

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 06:32:02 PM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 06:21:09 PM
I appreciate hearing different viewpoints, but I will mock them if they're totally stupid. :) I find the "Why, when I was a kid we had polio, rocky mountain spotted fever, and spinal meningitis all rolled into one... half of us survived, I don't see what the big deal is" rhetoric painfully similar to the hipster malaise of refusing to be shocked or disturbed by anything. Being jaded and desensitized to suffering isn't a virtue.

I agree to that last...I'm not sure Hawk meant to imply that, but he can speak for himself.

I think my own husband has some issues in that aspect, that he has a litmus for "true suffering" that really makes me cringe.  Because like I said in another thread--how can we categorize anyone else's suffering other than our own?  It's a sketchy business at best.

I don't have to explain a fucking thing to that aggressive bitch, or any other motherfucker that wants to read things that I didn't say into my fucking words.

Quote from: Suu on October 27, 2011, 07:04:18 PM
I have to admit I'm not a huge fan of the chickenpox vaccine, though. It seems less effective than contracting the disease and you have to get regular boosters. Granted, I had an epic case of the pox when I was 5, and when the nurse last year saw my titer test, she was like...damn, you had the disease, huh?

I know that it's not so much as as the chickenpox that's scary, but the side effects. Obviously you'll be susceptible to getting shingles when you're older since, because varicella is a form of herp-a-derp, it never leaves your body, but contracting true chickenpox as an adult is fucking scary once the shots wear off. I wasn't thrilled with having to get that fucking DTaP and the Hep B series, myself, but I still did it. I'd much rather get chickenpox again than Hep B.  :kingmeh:

I had chickenpox and shingles. Granny taped socks on my hands so I wouldn't scratch with chickenpox because that's what scars so bad. Shingles came when I was 30 or so and I wouldn't wish that shit on anybody, it was the worst pain I have ever experienced.

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 27, 2011, 01:31:28 PM
Is there an official name for the fallacy of "criticism of A is invalid, because B is so much worse"?

This is the most hurtful post you have ever made towards me.

Quote from: Cain on October 27, 2011, 04:03:47 PM
More to the point, telling people they are retarded for their beliefs doesn't actually shame them into thinking about it and perhaps abandoning their faith, if anything, it tends to make them more obstinate in their beliefs.

If you're looking to actually make people more secular and more rational in their daily lives, castigating them for being a dumb motherfucker isn't really going to work now, is it?

Damn.

Well put.

(out of order quote follows)

Quote from: Jenne on October 25, 2011, 07:07:02 PM
Well, those that want the population to diminish, they should applaud this, as one of the side effects of these diseases is sterlization...

Again, I think the blase attitude would change if someone passed around pictures like how they did in Health class back in the old says--you see a series of syphillitic, pustulant dicks and vages, and you REALLY start to think you don't mind the jimmy-hat so much.

I was under the impression that sentiment runs very high on the board. 

Which has always confused me a little, considering a few other ideas that are popular here. 

But then, I'm frequently wrong and or misinterpret these sorts of things.

I agree with CB's post. 

I've always taken a bit of an issue with the attempt of humans to medically engineer (and socially engineer) natural pressures on the species to survive, out of existence. 

My parents innoculated my sister and me because that was the only way to attend school and it was the smart thing to do.  All of the basics, and the boosters.

I have made sure that my own son has received all of the same, and it's required by law in Mexico, even if I chose not to.

Still, after the first flu shot I received when I was, I don't know..  very young, and acquired a bad cold for months, my parents decided to never take me for a flu shot again.  I have never had one since, to this day, and get the "flu" maybe once every 2 years.  It's bad for 2 weeks and I spike a fever I have to break every 6-8 hours in the first week, and stay in bed, but other than that my body fights it off and is better for it.

In this rush to protect ourselves from viruses, are we making ourselves weaker?  Certain types aggressively mutate to become immune to anti-viral medications. 

This doesn't even begin to address the issues of overpopulation of the planet and my own ideas on viruses being possibly the only check on human population, being THE dominant life form on this planet with no natural predators (other than ourselves) and the implications that has when we are attempting to medicate the effect of viruses out of the population.

Fodder for another post.  Maybe.

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 28, 2011, 01:43:27 AM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 06:32:02 PM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 06:21:09 PM
I appreciate hearing different viewpoints, but I will mock them if they're totally stupid. :) I find the "Why, when I was a kid we had polio, rocky mountain spotted fever, and spinal meningitis all rolled into one... half of us survived, I don't see what the big deal is" rhetoric painfully similar to the hipster malaise of refusing to be shocked or disturbed by anything. Being jaded and desensitized to suffering isn't a virtue.

I agree to that last...I'm not sure Hawk meant to imply that, but he can speak for himself.

I think my own husband has some issues in that aspect, that he has a litmus for "true suffering" that really makes me cringe.  Because like I said in another thread--how can we categorize anyone else's suffering other than our own?  It's a sketchy business at best.

I don't have to explain a fucking thing to that aggressive bitch, or any other motherfucker that wants to read things that I didn't say into my fucking words.

fwiw, I didn't read anything into your posts.

Quote from: Disco Pickle on October 28, 2011, 03:23:44 AM
I agree with CB's post. 

I've always taken a bit of an issue with the attempt of humans to medically engineer (and socially engineer) natural pressures on the species to survive, out of existence. 

My parents innoculated my sister and me because that was the only way to attend school and it was the smart thing to do.  All of the basics, and the boosters.

I have made sure that my own son has received all of the same, and it's required by law in Mexico, even if I chose not to.

Still, after the first flu shot I received when I was, I don't know..  very young, and acquired a bad cold for months, my parents decided to never take me for a flu shot again.  I have never had one since, to this day, and get the "flu" maybe once every 2 years.  It's bad for 2 weeks and I spike a fever I have to break every 6-8 hours in the first week, and stay in bed, but other than that my body fights it off and is better for it.

In this rush to protect ourselves from viruses, are we making ourselves weaker?  Certain types aggressively mutate to become immune to anti-viral medications. 

This doesn't even begin to address the issues of overpopulation of the planet and my own ideas on viruses being possibly the only check on human population, being THE dominant life form on this planet with no natural predators (other than ourselves) and the implications that has when we are attempting to medicate the effect of viruses out of the population.

Fodder for another post.  Maybe.

So you would rather more people die as a means of population control instead of there being less people being born?

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 28, 2011, 01:37:12 AM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 04:53:14 PM
BACK IN THE GOOD OLD DAYS, MAN. MOTHERS DRANK AND SMOKED THROUGH THEIR PREGNANCIES AND KIDS NEVER WORE SEAT BELTS AND BABIES JUST RODE IN THEY MAMMA'S LAP, WE WOULD JUST RUN AROUND ALL DAY UNSUPERVISED AND SWIM IN THE RIVER AND WE ALL GOT MEASLES, MUMPS, RUBELLA, CHICKEN POX, SMALLPOX, YELLOW FEVER, DENGUE FEVER, AND MALARIA AND WE ALL TURNED OUT JUST FINE. NO BABIES WERE EVER LOW BIRTH WEIGHT OR STILLBORN AND NOBODY EVER DIED OF CONTUSIONS AFTER A CAR ACCIDENT AND THERE WAS NO SUCH THING AS CRIB DEATH AND NONE OF US EVER DROWNED OR WERE KIDNAPPED OR RAPED, THAT'S JUST THE WAY THINGS WERE BACK IN THE GOOD OLD DAYS WHEN PEOPLE WERE TOUGHER.

HERE'S A THOUGHT, GO FUCK YOURSELF BITCH. In the future, if I post anything that offends you...GOOD.

:lulz: You can't offend me, Charley. You're too pitiful and histrionic to be anything more than a joke to me.

QuoteIn this rush to protect ourselves from viruses, are we making ourselves weaker?  Certain types aggressively mutate to become immune to anti-viral medications.  

I don't think that's quite how it works with vaccines though. If you vaccinate everybody against a virus, not only do we become stronger, but we then have the ability to eradicate the virus entirely. Vaccinations stimulate your immune system to a particular antigen by showing your immune system what to attack. It's like giving a police dog a suspect's shirt.

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 28, 2011, 04:27:05 AM

QuoteIn this rush to protect ourselves from viruses, are we making ourselves weaker?  Certain types aggressively mutate to become immune to anti-viral medications.  

I don't think that's quite how it works with vaccines though. If you vaccinate everybody against a virus, not only do we become stronger, but we then have the ability to eradicate the virus entirely. Vaccinations stimulate your immune system to a particular antigen by showing your immune system what to attack. It's like giving a police dog a suspect's shirt.

This.

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 03:45:08 PM
While looking up fallacies, I found this: http://richarddawkins.net/discussions/641922-the-wtf-fallacy-and-others

which reminded me of how much I hate atheists, because they are such pompous dicks. If I was World Empress, I would get anti-vaccers, rabid atheists, Anarchists, and Libertarians together in a big catered conference and not let anyone leave until they reached consensus.

So, life imprisonment, then.

At least they'll be well fed.

Quote from: Precious Moments Zalgo on October 28, 2011, 05:24:15 AM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 03:45:08 PM
While looking up fallacies, I found this: http://richarddawkins.net/discussions/641922-the-wtf-fallacy-and-others

which reminded me of how much I hate atheists, because they are such pompous dicks. If I was World Empress, I would get anti-vaccers, rabid atheists, Anarchists, and Libertarians together in a big catered conference and not let anyone leave until they reached consensus.

So, life imprisonment, then.

At least they'll be well fed.

I would be a kind and benevolent World Empress.

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 28, 2011, 02:32:00 AM

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 27, 2011, 01:31:28 PM
Is there an official name for the fallacy of "criticism of A is invalid, because B is so much worse"?

This is the most hurtful post you have ever made towards me.

Charlie, I literally had to read your post 3 times before I could clearly say to myself "He's not using the Dawkins argument. He's saying that some problems stem from systemic issues which aren't readily apparent if looking at acute issues." Course, it did help that I hallucinated Kai's avatar whispering 'Emergence' into my ear at the time.


I'd seriously chalk it up to misunderstanding and lack of clarification on both sides...

Quote from: Donald Coyote on October 28, 2011, 04:16:34 AM

Quote from: Disco Pickle on October 28, 2011, 03:23:44 AM
I agree with CB's post. 

I've always taken a bit of an issue with the attempt of humans to medically engineer (and socially engineer) natural pressures on the species to survive, out of existence. 

My parents innoculated my sister and me because that was the only way to attend school and it was the smart thing to do.  All of the basics, and the boosters.

I have made sure that my own son has received all of the same, and it's required by law in Mexico, even if I chose not to.

Still, after the first flu shot I received when I was, I don't know..  very young, and acquired a bad cold for months, my parents decided to never take me for a flu shot again.  I have never had one since, to this day, and get the "flu" maybe once every 2 years.  It's bad for 2 weeks and I spike a fever I have to break every 6-8 hours in the first week, and stay in bed, but other than that my body fights it off and is better for it.

In this rush to protect ourselves from viruses, are we making ourselves weaker?  Certain types aggressively mutate to become immune to anti-viral medications. 

This doesn't even begin to address the issues of overpopulation of the planet and my own ideas on viruses being possibly the only check on human population, being THE dominant life form on this planet with no natural predators (other than ourselves) and the implications that has when we are attempting to medicate the effect of viruses out of the population.

Fodder for another post.  Maybe.

So you would rather more people die as a means of population control instead of there being less people being born?

No.  That would be a pretty callous position to take.

In an ideal world, less people would be born because all humans would consciously ignore the biological imperative to breed and instead focus on and care about the sustainability of the planet on which we live.

That world doesn't exist, and likely never will.

If a large host of our problems stem from overpopulation, and there's no end in sight to the exponential growth of population (not everywhere, but it's not necessary for it to BE everywhere for exponents to still be a factor) then what about the moral implications regarding the attempt to eliminate any natural mortal pressures on the dominant species (us) on the planet, not even mentioning the attempt to extend our lifespan 10 years more (or so) every century?

I really struggle with this one. 

Quote from: Disco Pickle on October 28, 2011, 01:00:06 PM

Quote from: Donald Coyote on October 28, 2011, 04:16:34 AM

Quote from: Disco Pickle on October 28, 2011, 03:23:44 AM
I agree with CB's post. 

I've always taken a bit of an issue with the attempt of humans to medically engineer (and socially engineer) natural pressures on the species to survive, out of existence. 

My parents innoculated my sister and me because that was the only way to attend school and it was the smart thing to do.  All of the basics, and the boosters.

I have made sure that my own son has received all of the same, and it's required by law in Mexico, even if I chose not to.

Still, after the first flu shot I received when I was, I don't know..  very young, and acquired a bad cold for months, my parents decided to never take me for a flu shot again.  I have never had one since, to this day, and get the "flu" maybe once every 2 years.  It's bad for 2 weeks and I spike a fever I have to break every 6-8 hours in the first week, and stay in bed, but other than that my body fights it off and is better for it.

In this rush to protect ourselves from viruses, are we making ourselves weaker?  Certain types aggressively mutate to become immune to anti-viral medications. 

This doesn't even begin to address the issues of overpopulation of the planet and my own ideas on viruses being possibly the only check on human population, being THE dominant life form on this planet with no natural predators (other than ourselves) and the implications that has when we are attempting to medicate the effect of viruses out of the population.

Fodder for another post.  Maybe.

So you would rather more people die as a means of population control instead of there being less people being born?

No.  That would be a pretty callous position to take.

In an ideal world, less people would be born because all humans would consciously ignore the biological imperative to breed and instead focus on and care about the sustainability of the planet on which we live.

That world doesn't exist, and likely never will.

If a large host of our problems stem from overpopulation, and there's no end in sight to the exponential growth of population (not everywhere, but it's not necessary for it to BE everywhere for exponents to still be a factor) then what about the moral implications regarding the attempt to eliminate any natural mortal pressures on the dominant species (us) on the planet, not even mentioning the attempt to extend our lifespan 10 years more (or so) every century?

I really struggle with this one. 

Education solves that problem. Or are you under the belief that despite the correlation between the level of education and the age at which men and women start having children is just coincidence?

Furthermore, it is not a biological imperative to reproduce, it a simply that sex feels really good. We like doing things that feel good. That is the same reason that animals do it. it feels good. They aren't thinking, "OMG I MUST HAZ TEH BABBIES!!!!" Do a lot of humans think that way? Yes they do, but that is because we notice the correlation between intercourse and pregnancy.

Quote from: Donald Coyote on October 28, 2011, 01:11:42 PM

Quote from: Disco Pickle on October 28, 2011, 01:00:06 PM

Quote from: Donald Coyote on October 28, 2011, 04:16:34 AM

Quote from: Disco Pickle on October 28, 2011, 03:23:44 AM
I agree with CB's post. 

I've always taken a bit of an issue with the attempt of humans to medically engineer (and socially engineer) natural pressures on the species to survive, out of existence. 

My parents innoculated my sister and me because that was the only way to attend school and it was the smart thing to do.  All of the basics, and the boosters.

I have made sure that my own son has received all of the same, and it's required by law in Mexico, even if I chose not to.

Still, after the first flu shot I received when I was, I don't know..  very young, and acquired a bad cold for months, my parents decided to never take me for a flu shot again.  I have never had one since, to this day, and get the "flu" maybe once every 2 years.  It's bad for 2 weeks and I spike a fever I have to break every 6-8 hours in the first week, and stay in bed, but other than that my body fights it off and is better for it.

In this rush to protect ourselves from viruses, are we making ourselves weaker?  Certain types aggressively mutate to become immune to anti-viral medications. 

This doesn't even begin to address the issues of overpopulation of the planet and my own ideas on viruses being possibly the only check on human population, being THE dominant life form on this planet with no natural predators (other than ourselves) and the implications that has when we are attempting to medicate the effect of viruses out of the population.

Fodder for another post.  Maybe.

So you would rather more people die as a means of population control instead of there being less people being born?

No.  That would be a pretty callous position to take.

In an ideal world, less people would be born because all humans would consciously ignore the biological imperative to breed and instead focus on and care about the sustainability of the planet on which we live.

That world doesn't exist, and likely never will.

If a large host of our problems stem from overpopulation, and there's no end in sight to the exponential growth of population (not everywhere, but it's not necessary for it to BE everywhere for exponents to still be a factor) then what about the moral implications regarding the attempt to eliminate any natural mortal pressures on the dominant species (us) on the planet, not even mentioning the attempt to extend our lifespan 10 years more (or so) every century?

I really struggle with this one. 

Education solves that problem. Or are you under the belief that despite the correlation between the level of education and the age at which men and women start having children is just coincidence?

Furthermore, it is not a biological imperative to reproduce, it a simply that sex feels really good. We like doing things that feel good. That is the same reason that animals do it. it feels good. They aren't thinking, "OMG I MUST HAZ TEH BABBIES!!!!" Do a lot of humans think that way? Yes they do, but that is because we notice the correlation between intercourse and pregnancy.

I know education solves that problem.  But education isn't happening fast enough to keep up.  I'm not convinced it ever will.

QuoteThey aren't thinking, "OMG I MUST HAZ TEH BABBIES!!!!"

I've known more women (and a few men, though not nearly as many) who think (or thought, before they actually had a few) that way than I have who decide to wait or not have them altogether.

That impetus comes from societal and religious pressure.

It also depends on geographic location. The only people I've known who have been like that were all transplants from the Midwest. New Englanders don't seek out reproduction.

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 28, 2011, 01:45:50 PM
That impetus comes from societal and religious pressure.

It also depends on geographic location. The only people I've known who have been like that were all transplants from the Midwest. New Englanders don't seek out reproduction.

Are you sure about that?

http://www-958.ibm.com/software/data/cognos/manyeyes/visualizations/us-birth-rate-by-state-map

http://www.mapofusa.net/us-population-density-map.htm

@dp
first a clarification. the "they" refers to animals.
second, in your example of people you know wanting to make babies, it is not a biological imperitive, buta conscious choice on their part.

like twid said, there are cultural and religious factors.  

Quote from: Disco Pickle on October 28, 2011, 01:58:01 PM

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 28, 2011, 01:45:50 PM
That impetus comes from societal and religious pressure.

It also depends on geographic location. The only people I've known who have been like that were all transplants from the Midwest. New Englanders don't seek out reproduction.

Are you sure about that?

http://www-958.ibm.com/software/data/cognos/manyeyes/visualizations/us-birth-rate-by-state-map

http://www.mapofusa.net/us-population-density-map.htm

Well, naturally we have to reproduce at some point, and the Northeast contains a quarter of the US population. But we don't have the mindset that we have to have children. And we certainly don't feel like we have to have them anytime in our 20s. Sure, I know 20 something parents, but usually that's because they feel as if they've hit the apex of their careers.

ETA: Families in the Northeast these days also tend to be smaller than they were than in my mother's generation. Why? Because we laugh at the Pope when he tells us not to use condoms these days.

Also adding: Population density does not equal birth rate.

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 28, 2011, 04:01:16 AM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 28, 2011, 01:43:27 AM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 06:32:02 PM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 06:21:09 PM
I appreciate hearing different viewpoints, but I will mock them if they're totally stupid. :) I find the "Why, when I was a kid we had polio, rocky mountain spotted fever, and spinal meningitis all rolled into one... half of us survived, I don't see what the big deal is" rhetoric painfully similar to the hipster malaise of refusing to be shocked or disturbed by anything. Being jaded and desensitized to suffering isn't a virtue.

I agree to that last...I'm not sure Hawk meant to imply that, but he can speak for himself.

I think my own husband has some issues in that aspect, that he has a litmus for "true suffering" that really makes me cringe.  Because like I said in another thread--how can we categorize anyone else's suffering other than our own?  It's a sketchy business at best.

I don't have to explain a fucking thing to that aggressive bitch, or any other motherfucker that wants to read things that I didn't say into my fucking words.

fwiw, I didn't read anything into your posts.

I appreciate that.

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 27, 2011, 04:05:28 AM
You are still only addressing symptoms of a greater problem and not the solution.

I'm addressing the problem that /bad science is going on, and people believe it/. Okay? You can have your misanthropy, but that isn't relevant to MY interest. My interest is that one of the greatest achievements of humans is being derided because people are being intentionally mislead by bad science and fabricated data. I'm pissed off about it in the same way that moon hoaxers drive me nuts. This is about science.

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 28, 2011, 01:43:27 AM

Quote from: Jenne on October 27, 2011, 06:32:02 PM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 06:21:09 PM
I appreciate hearing different viewpoints, but I will mock them if they're totally stupid. :) I find the "Why, when I was a kid we had polio, rocky mountain spotted fever, and spinal meningitis all rolled into one... half of us survived, I don't see what the big deal is" rhetoric painfully similar to the hipster malaise of refusing to be shocked or disturbed by anything. Being jaded and desensitized to suffering isn't a virtue.

I agree to that last...I'm not sure Hawk meant to imply that, but he can speak for himself.

I think my own husband has some issues in that aspect, that he has a litmus for "true suffering" that really makes me cringe.  Because like I said in another thread--how can we categorize anyone else's suffering other than our own?  It's a sketchy business at best.

I don't have to explain a fucking thing to that aggressive bitch, or any other motherfucker that wants to read things that I didn't say into my fucking words.

Totally agree, man.  :)  Just didn't want to mischaracterize your words myself, is all.  :)

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 28, 2011, 02:24:10 AM

Quote from: Suu on October 27, 2011, 07:04:18 PM
I have to admit I'm not a huge fan of the chickenpox vaccine, though. It seems less effective than contracting the disease and you have to get regular boosters. Granted, I had an epic case of the pox when I was 5, and when the nurse last year saw my titer test, she was like...damn, you had the disease, huh?

I know that it's not so much as as the chickenpox that's scary, but the side effects. Obviously you'll be susceptible to getting shingles when you're older since, because varicella is a form of herp-a-derp, it never leaves your body, but contracting true chickenpox as an adult is fucking scary once the shots wear off. I wasn't thrilled with having to get that fucking DTaP and the Hep B series, myself, but I still did it. I'd much rather get chickenpox again than Hep B.  :kingmeh:

I had chickenpox and shingles. Granny taped socks on my hands so I wouldn't scratch with chickenpox because that's what scars so bad. Shingles came when I was 30 or so and I wouldn't wish that shit on anybody, it was the worst pain I have ever experienced.

I've heard it's horrible.  And you can have outbreaks at any time, like Herpes...though I'm sure they've come out with an immunosuppressant that suppresses the outbreaks like they have for Herpes as well.

Quote from: Disco Pickle on October 28, 2011, 03:00:43 AM

Quote from: Jenne on October 25, 2011, 07:07:02 PM
Well, those that want the population to diminish, they should applaud this, as one of the side effects of these diseases is sterlization...

Again, I think the blase attitude would change if someone passed around pictures like how they did in Health class back in the old says--you see a series of syphillitic, pustulant dicks and vages, and you REALLY start to think you don't mind the jimmy-hat so much.

I was under the impression that sentiment runs very high on the board. 

Which has always confused me a little, considering a few other ideas that are popular here. 

But then, I'm frequently wrong and or misinterpret these sorts of things.

Yeah, it was a tongue-in-cheek response on my part, to be sure.

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 28, 2011, 02:18:59 PM
ETA: Families in the Northeast these days also tend to be smaller than they were than in my mother's generation. Why? Because we laugh at the Pope when he tells us not to use condoms these days.

Also adding: Population density does not equal birth rate.

I want to say that this is pretty true. If I compare the family demographics of my friends here in the Northeast versus my friend in Florida, there's a vast difference. I wouldn't call my friends in Florida uneducated, either, they just decided that they wanted children whereas my friends up here did not (though I disagree with a lot of their circumstances). Cost has a lot to do with it too. The standard of living up here feels like it's twice what it is down there. When my single friends down there decided it's okay to bring the product of a one-night-stand into the world, it doesn't require them to sell their car to buy groceries. It's also a LOT harder to get assistance up here because of the competitive population.

The Greater Tampa Bay area is bigger and more populated than the entire state of Rhode Island, but when compared to overall density in the state, Rhode Island wins (almost 2 million people in 60 square miles...). Getting unemployment and any sort of temporary benefit up here is like pulling teeth, and I can't describe what my boss is going through to get WIC just to make ends meet with her family. It makes it not worth the hassle, IMO. Wait until you can afford to support yourself comfortably before attempting to have a kid. I'm so glad that Herbert and I decided to not go through with it, aside from the divorce, it would have royally fucked us financially.

Quote from: Telarus on October 28, 2011, 07:27:13 AM

Quote from: Charley Brown on October 28, 2011, 02:32:00 AM

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 27, 2011, 01:31:28 PM
Is there an official name for the fallacy of "criticism of A is invalid, because B is so much worse"?

This is the most hurtful post you have ever made towards me.

Charlie, I literally had to read your post 3 times before I could clearly say to myself "He's not using the Dawkins argument. He's saying that some problems stem from systemic issues which aren't readily apparent if looking at acute issues." Course, it did help that I hallucinated Kai's avatar whispering 'Emergence' into my ear at the time.


I'd seriously chalk it up to misunderstanding and lack of clarification on both sides...

Yeah, but saying "That's not what I meant, let me explain" is a lot simpler and more effective than ""BLEAGGHAHGAHSFHGFJAGJFAJ YOU BITCH FUCK YOU", so it's not really an option for him.

I'm going to test a theory:

(http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db46_fig1.png)

compared to
Map of adults 25years+ who completed h.s. 2005-2009 data sample (from here (http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ThematicMapFramesetServlet?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-tm_name=ACS_2009_5YR_G00_M00613&-ds_name=ACS_2009_5YR_G00_&-_MapEvent=displayBy&-_dBy=040&-redoLog=false&-tm_config=%7Cb=50%7Cl=en%7Ct=403%7Czf=0.0%7Cms=thm_def%7Cdw=1.9557697048764706E7%7Cdh=1.4455689123E7%7Cdt=gov.census.aff.domain.map.LSRMapExtent%7Cif=gif%7Ccx=-1159354.4733499996%7Ccy=7122022.5%7Czl=10%7Cpz=10%7Cbo=%7Cbl=%7Cft=350:349:335:389:388:332:331%7Cfl=403:381:204:380:369:379:368%7Cg=01000US%7Cds=DEC_2000_SF3_U%7Csb=50%7Ctud=false%7Cdb=040%7Cmn=60%7Cmx=88.3%7Ccc=1%7Ccm=1%7Ccn=5%7Ccb=%7Cum=Percent%7Cpr=1%7Cth=DEC_2000_SF3_U_M00160%7Csf=N%7Csg=#?353,293))) (edited this portion to be more accurate.)

(http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h183/Jenne73/mapeducation.png)

Quote from: Jenne on October 28, 2011, 04:27:28 PM
I'm going to test a theory:

(http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db46_fig1.png)

compared to
Map of adults 25years+ who completed h.s. (from here (http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ThematicMapFramesetServlet?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-tm_name=ACS_2009_5YR_G00_M00613&-ds_name=ACS_2009_5YR_G00_&-_MapEvent=displayBy&-_dBy=040&-redoLog=false&-tm_config=%7Cb=50%7Cl=en%7Ct=403%7Czf=0.0%7Cms=thm_def%7Cdw=1.9557697048764706E7%7Cdh=1.4455689123E7%7Cdt=gov.census.aff.domain.map.LSRMapExtent%7Cif=gif%7Ccx=-1159354.4733499996%7Ccy=7122022.5%7Czl=10%7Cpz=10%7Cbo=%7Cbl=%7Cft=350:349:335:389:388:332:331%7Cfl=403:381:204:380:369:379:368%7Cg=01000US%7Cds=DEC_2000_SF3_U%7Csb=50%7Ctud=false%7Cdb=040%7Cmn=60%7Cmx=88.3%7Ccc=1%7Ccm=1%7Ccn=5%7Ccb=%7Cum=Percent%7Cpr=1%7Cth=DEC_2000_SF3_U_M00160%7Csf=N%7Csg=#?353,293))) (edited this portion to be more accurate.

(http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h183/Jenne73/mapeducation.png)

i wonder how that compares to population density as well.

Population density isn't directly relevant unless your theory is that density affects births per capita.

Quote from: Nigel on October 28, 2011, 04:37:49 PM
Population density isn't directly relevant unless your theory is that density affects births per capita.

it might also have an effect, but i still believe education to be the main driving force behind populatin figures.

Quote from: Donald Coyote on October 28, 2011, 04:40:24 PM

Quote from: Nigel on October 28, 2011, 04:37:49 PM
Population density isn't directly relevant unless your theory is that density affects births per capita.

it might also have an effect, but i still believe education to be the main driving force behind populatin figures.

Population density, at least until recently, has been a force in the exchange of ideas. Maybe not education, or direct education, but in urban areas there's lots of different people to talk to. You could sponge someone else's education through conversation, or could conjecture on something by putting your two drunken heads together.

Theoretically the internet would bring that effect into rural areas too, but since the internet seems like a place full of stupid...

Quote from: Nph. Twid. on October 27, 2011, 03:09:19 PM

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 27, 2011, 01:31:28 PM
Is there an official name for the fallacy of "criticism of A is invalid, because B is so much worse"?

Kai has coined the phrase Dawkins Fallacy for it, which I like, because he's kind of a douche.

Yep. In the Occupy thread. http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=30415.msg1103581#msg1103581

Also called it argumentum ad oblitum. But I like Dawkins Fallacy better. Kinda like santorum means "the froth associated with anal sex".

Quote from: Donald Coyote on October 28, 2011, 04:40:24 PM

Quote from: Nigel on October 28, 2011, 04:37:49 PM
Population density isn't directly relevant unless your theory is that density affects births per capita.

it might also have an effect, but i still believe education to be the main driving force behind populatin figures.

It's clearly indirectly relevant in fostering education (though with urban poverty, density and education may hold inverse relationships) but it is rather problematic to try to increase education through encouraging population density. I think it is relevant to look at the relationship between education and population density, though, because it could give us ideas on improving education services to areas which need it.

Quote from: Telarus on October 28, 2011, 07:27:13 AM
Course, it did help that I hallucinated Kai's avatar whispering 'Emergence' into my ear at the time.

:lulz:

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 06:21:09 PM
I appreciate hearing different viewpoints, but I will mock them if they're totally stupid. :) I find the "Why, when I was a kid we had polio, rocky mountain spotted fever, and spinal meningitis all rolled into one... half of us survived, I don't see what the big deal is" rhetoric painfully similar to the hipster malaise of refusing to be shocked or disturbed by anything. Being jaded and desensitized to suffering isn't a virtue.

More to the point, and this isn't a dig at anyone...

...Any society that can't be bothered to protect its members when that protection is possible and affordable no longer has the right to call itself civilized.

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on October 29, 2011, 04:45:33 AM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 06:21:09 PM
I appreciate hearing different viewpoints, but I will mock them if they're totally stupid. :) I find the "Why, when I was a kid we had polio, rocky mountain spotted fever, and spinal meningitis all rolled into one... half of us survived, I don't see what the big deal is" rhetoric painfully similar to the hipster malaise of refusing to be shocked or disturbed by anything. Being jaded and desensitized to suffering isn't a virtue.

More to the point, and this isn't a dig at anyone...

...Any society that can't be bothered to protect its members when that protection is possible and affordable no longer has the right to call itself civilized.

That ties very much into what I believe the purpose of a society is. It is what tribalism becomes when implemented on a larger scale; the expressed ability of the stronger members of society to provide space for the weakest members to contribute, in order to make the whole society stronger. I think that a society is only as strong as its weakest members. A society that allows its weakest to die does not become stronger. You might initially think that is not very Darwinian of me, (and, fairly, I am not a Darwinist) but Darwinism as applied to species has different rules than Darwinism applied to individuals. It can benefit a species, especially in terms of evolution and diversification, to protect its weaker members. It certainly benefits a society, which is an organism in its own right.

Quote from: Nigel on October 29, 2011, 06:30:02 AM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on October 29, 2011, 04:45:33 AM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 06:21:09 PM
I appreciate hearing different viewpoints, but I will mock them if they're totally stupid. :) I find the "Why, when I was a kid we had polio, rocky mountain spotted fever, and spinal meningitis all rolled into one... half of us survived, I don't see what the big deal is" rhetoric painfully similar to the hipster malaise of refusing to be shocked or disturbed by anything. Being jaded and desensitized to suffering isn't a virtue.

More to the point, and this isn't a dig at anyone...

...Any society that can't be bothered to protect its members when that protection is possible and affordable no longer has the right to call itself civilized.

That ties very much into what I believe the purpose of a society is. It is what tribalism becomes when implemented on a larger scale; the expressed ability of the stronger members of society to provide space for the weakest members to contribute, in order to make the whole society stronger. I think that a society is only as strong as its weakest members. A society that allows its weakest to die does not become stronger. You might initially think that is not very Darwinian of me, (and, fairly, I am not a Darwinist) but Darwinism as applied to species has different rules than Darwinism applied to individuals. It can benefit a species, especially in terms of evolution and diversification, to protect its weaker members. It certainly benefits a society, which is an organism in its own right.

Twitch,

Thinking...

Woah, slight paradigm shift here.
I already considered groups to share some of the traits of organisms but you just made me realise that survival of the fittest in this context means survival of the most genetically(and maybe cultural too?) diverse society. I now have a measure for the fitness of any society. Thanks Nigel!

This fits in nicely with the plurality of solutions concept: It is always better to use multiple solutions instead of forcing the use of only one.
Example: money, i've read about some places that allow multiple forms of money to exist and that they tend to have a slightly less unstable economy.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/economy/economics-mainmenu-44/3985-alternative-currencies-flourishing-in-germany

:thanks:

Quote from: Nigel on October 29, 2011, 06:30:02 AM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on October 29, 2011, 04:45:33 AM

Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2011, 06:21:09 PM
I appreciate hearing different viewpoints, but I will mock them if they're totally stupid. :) I find the "Why, when I was a kid we had polio, rocky mountain spotted fever, and spinal meningitis all rolled into one... half of us survived, I don't see what the big deal is" rhetoric painfully similar to the hipster malaise of refusing to be shocked or disturbed by anything. Being jaded and desensitized to suffering isn't a virtue.

More to the point, and this isn't a dig at anyone...

...Any society that can't be bothered to protect its members when that protection is possible and affordable no longer has the right to call itself civilized.

That ties very much into what I believe the purpose of a society is. It is what tribalism becomes when implemented on a larger scale; the expressed ability of the stronger members of society to provide space for the weakest members to contribute, in order to make the whole society stronger. I think that a society is only as strong as its weakest members. A society that allows its weakest to die does not become stronger. You might initially think that is not very Darwinian of me, (and, fairly, I am not a Darwinist) but Darwinism as applied to species has different rules than Darwinism applied to individuals. It can benefit a species, especially in terms of evolution and diversification, to protect its weaker members. It certainly benefits a society, which is an organism in its own right.

Darwin would have agreed with you, actually. Social Darwinism is a misnomer. In On the Descent of Man, he talks about his concern for the people of Tierra del Fuego and his interest in their status being elevated. And in terms of physical strength, he was not a strong or well person himself. It's believed he contracted chagas disease while on the Beagle, and was plagued with bouts of extreme weakness for the rest of his life.

I know there is a great deal of focus on gene-level selection these days, but multiple levels of selection need to be considered, especially in social animals. MLS theory predicts that when there is competition between populations or communities, selection will act on the /population or community overall/ as well as on the individual and genetic level (because there are of course still selection pressures on those). Since people in human societies rely on each other, the collapse of the society will trump the individual or genetic pressures. Only those cultures that can survive the selection pressures made by other cultures/populations will sustain themselves; those which cannot cooperate internally will disintegrate quickly. Gould and E.O. Wilson have been very strident about these observations. It seems to me that cooperation includes caring for all the members.

Chicken Pox Lollipops! (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8875158/American-parents-caught-selling-chickenpox-infected-lollipops.html)
:lulz:

Quote from: Iptuous on November 07, 2011, 07:14:04 PM
Chicken Pox Lollipops! (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8875158/American-parents-caught-selling-chickenpox-infected-lollipops.html)
:lulz:

No shit.  Wow.  The world of stupid just got...stupider.

I'm telling you, there's a reason I hate anti-vaccers so fucking much. They're not just stupid; they're dangerously stupid. These morons would rather their kid expose immune-deficient people and end up with shingles outbreaks in their later years than get a $28 booster shot every 7 years and see the disease completely eradicated.

You know these twats would be doing the same thing with more dangerous diseases too, if they thought they could turn a buck.

I still tend to see this as an education issue.  The fallacy these anti-vaccinators rely on in their pursuit rests on 2 areas: 1) the lack of potential danger of contracting these what are now seen as "minor diseases" (due to the fact children get them and tend to survive them rather well in today's modern world of better nutrition and hygeine and just overall care) and 2) the faulty information that the side effects cause more harm than the vaccination cures.

If someone sat down (I'm looking at YOU, Pediatricians!) and told them the facts as they stand, showed them pictures of what cherub-cheeked little Johnny would look like all pox'd up or what his testicles would become through contracting mumps...then perhaps there'd be less of this tide against "just cuz the doctors SAY so."

In the end, that's exactly how I see it:  bitches don't KNOW what they're sowing...and the rest of us will reap along with them, thanks to their ignorance and stubborness.

In related news, there's a whooping cough outbreak in IL.  Which is preventable through vaccination. (http://news.yahoo.com/whooping-cough-outbreak-strikes-mchenry-county-171600433.html)

That was CA last year, so they made it a law that kids have to get vaccinated between the ages the vaccine is good, or they don't go to school.

This is always easier on the legal side than practical on the education side.  It just made it to where the schools had to work harder and sometimes partner with vaccine clinics to get kids through a revolving door into vaccination land.

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on November 16, 2011, 05:51:58 PM
In related news, there's a whooping cough outbreak in IL.  Which is preventable through vaccination. (http://news.yahoo.com/whooping-cough-outbreak-strikes-mchenry-county-171600433.html)

Yeah, in fact the DPT vaccine is normally one of the first ones babies receive. Did you know that pertussis was once completely eradicated from the US?

Way to go, morons. Bringing back dangerous diseases that are completely preventable! Because out of every million vaccinations given, a few kids may experience side effects, so it's better to leave them unprotected from a disease that can kill them or cause permanent neurological damage.

Thanks, America.

Quote from: Nigel on November 16, 2011, 08:28:16 PM

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on November 16, 2011, 05:51:58 PM
In related news, there's a whooping cough outbreak in IL.  Which is preventable through vaccination. (http://news.yahoo.com/whooping-cough-outbreak-strikes-mchenry-county-171600433.html)

Yeah, in fact the DPT vaccine is normally one of the first ones babies receive. Did you know that pertussis was once completely eradicated from the US?

Way to go, morons. Bringing back dangerous diseases that are completely preventable! Because out of every million vaccinations given, a few kids may experience side effects, so it's better to leave them unprotected from a disease that can kill them or cause permanent neurological damage.

Thanks, America.

This is why monkeys should not be allowed to run a planet.

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 16, 2011, 08:29:00 PM

Quote from: Nigel on November 16, 2011, 08:28:16 PM

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on November 16, 2011, 05:51:58 PM
In related news, there's a whooping cough outbreak in IL.  Which is preventable through vaccination. (http://news.yahoo.com/whooping-cough-outbreak-strikes-mchenry-county-171600433.html)

Yeah, in fact the DPT vaccine is normally one of the first ones babies receive. Did you know that pertussis was once completely eradicated from the US?

Way to go, morons. Bringing back dangerous diseases that are completely preventable! Because out of every million vaccinations given, a few kids may experience side effects, so it's better to leave them unprotected from a disease that can kill them or cause permanent neurological damage.

Thanks, America.

This is why monkeys should not be allowed to run a planet.

We need to get the cockroaches in charge ASAP.

Quote from: Nigel on November 16, 2011, 11:36:57 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 16, 2011, 08:29:00 PM

Quote from: Nigel on November 16, 2011, 08:28:16 PM

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on November 16, 2011, 05:51:58 PM
In related news, there's a whooping cough outbreak in IL.  Which is preventable through vaccination. (http://news.yahoo.com/whooping-cough-outbreak-strikes-mchenry-county-171600433.html)

Yeah, in fact the DPT vaccine is normally one of the first ones babies receive. Did you know that pertussis was once completely eradicated from the US?

Way to go, morons. Bringing back dangerous diseases that are completely preventable! Because out of every million vaccinations given, a few kids may experience side effects, so it's better to leave them unprotected from a disease that can kill them or cause permanent neurological damage.

Thanks, America.

This is why monkeys should not be allowed to run a planet.

We need to get the cockroaches in charge ASAP.

What makes you think they aren't?

Quote from: 'Kai' ZLB, M.S. on November 17, 2011, 01:28:11 AM

Quote from: Nigel on November 16, 2011, 11:36:57 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 16, 2011, 08:29:00 PM

Quote from: Nigel on November 16, 2011, 08:28:16 PM

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on November 16, 2011, 05:51:58 PM
In related news, there's a whooping cough outbreak in IL.  Which is preventable through vaccination. (http://news.yahoo.com/whooping-cough-outbreak-strikes-mchenry-county-171600433.html)

Yeah, in fact the DPT vaccine is normally one of the first ones babies receive. Did you know that pertussis was once completely eradicated from the US?

Way to go, morons. Bringing back dangerous diseases that are completely preventable! Because out of every million vaccinations given, a few kids may experience side effects, so it's better to leave them unprotected from a disease that can kill them or cause permanent neurological damage.

Thanks, America.

This is why monkeys should not be allowed to run a planet.

We need to get the cockroaches in charge ASAP.

What makes you think they aren't?

:lulz: It might explain a lot.

 :lulz:

Quote from: 'Kai' ZLB, M.S. on November 17, 2011, 01:28:11 AM

Quote from: Nigel on November 16, 2011, 11:36:57 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 16, 2011, 08:29:00 PM

Quote from: Nigel on November 16, 2011, 08:28:16 PM

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on November 16, 2011, 05:51:58 PM
In related news, there's a whooping cough outbreak in IL.  Which is preventable through vaccination. (http://news.yahoo.com/whooping-cough-outbreak-strikes-mchenry-county-171600433.html)

Yeah, in fact the DPT vaccine is normally one of the first ones babies receive. Did you know that pertussis was once completely eradicated from the US?

Way to go, morons. Bringing back dangerous diseases that are completely preventable! Because out of every million vaccinations given, a few kids may experience side effects, so it's better to leave them unprotected from a disease that can kill them or cause permanent neurological damage.

Thanks, America.

This is why monkeys should not be allowed to run a planet.

We need to get the cockroaches in charge ASAP.

What makes you think they aren't?

The mere fact that it was Kai who made the above comment makes it ever so much more ominous...




Kai.  He knows things.

 8) I can neither confirm nor deny that I am a double agent for the Royal Roach Assembly.

Quote from: 'Kai' ZLB, M.S. on November 18, 2011, 12:19:14 AM
8) I can neither confirm nor deny that I am a double agent for the Royal Roach Assembly.

:lulz: