Bill Gates and Vaccines

[Wygram]

What the **** are you talking about. Bill Gates already has tens of billions of dollars. He is giving away a big chunk of that to save lives via vaccines.

Yeah, it's called investing.
Are you seriously trying to tell me people that are rich don't care about money and making more?

Al Gore who supposedly wants to stop greenhouse gases being released, just set up a company that will be making trillions off them.

 

[Wygram]

So your evidence is that vaccines are made by a large corporation and therefore they must be bad?

Oh and thimerosal is a good thing. It was very, very stupid to ban it since there was no reason to get rid of such a valuable preservative.

No, I'm saying you're more skeptical in your approach to little guys than the big guy who is actually influencing your like. You're not skeptical or cautious, you just hate when people disagree with "what everyone thinks," which funnily enough is what big corporations tell you to think.

I'm sure thimerosal is a good thing. They should also start introduce lead and arsenic into the food supply.

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

If you were alive that long ago, and you read something like that I'm sure you wouldn't care.
What was true then, is true now unless proven different.

Proper procedure would be to show how vaccinations have changed since the release of that paper.

But great argument, the ridicule question... are you serious...?
haha

As you may be able to guess, being on a phone my ability to do a full reply is limited. Secondly, you've provided an 33yr old possible paper in isolation: cherry picking. Not impressed.


Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

 

[Capsid]

I've provided you with evidence as to how diseases had decreased substantially and were on a huge decline when penicillin etc was discovered. Obviously you just ignored my 'mumbo jumbo' article.

If you have an article on antivaxxer nutjobs killing people by encouraging them to not get vaccines your welcome to share. If you also have one on people dying because they didn't get a vaccine you can share that as well.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19966957

 

[dtugg]

I've provided you with evidence as to how diseases had decreased substantially and were on a huge decline when penicillin etc was discovered. Obviously you just ignored my 'mumbo jumbo' article.

From skimming it, it says nothing about the efficacy of vaccines.

If you have an article on antivaxxer nutjobs killing people by encouraging them to not get vaccines your welcome to share. If you also have one on people dying because they didn't get a vaccine you can share that as well.

Why would I bother, you already deny, despite overwhelming evidence that vaccines save lives.

 

[dtugg]

Yeah, it's called investing.
Are you seriously trying to tell me people that are rich don't care about money and making more?

Al Gore who supposedly wants to stop greenhouse gases being released, just set up a company that will be making trillions off them.

What part of the fact that Bill Gates is giving away billions of dollars to fight disease do you not understand?

Let me break it down for you.

Bill Gates has $50 billion dollars (mostly in Microsoft stock).
He is giving away $10 billion to save lives with vaccines (and he plans on giving away the rest of his wealth for various other causes before he dies).

Is it really too hard for you to understand?

 

[Ian Osborne]

What's wrong with that? Surely the best people to decide how the money is spent on global health are the experts?

Exactly. An argument from authority is only a fallacy if the quoted authority has no expertise in the subject in question. Consulting the experts is common sense.

 

[Travis]

No, I'm saying you're more skeptical in your approach to little guys than the big guy who is actually influencing your like. You're not skeptical or cautious, you just hate when people disagree with "what everyone thinks," which funnily enough is what big corporations tell you to think.

I don't think you should be presuming anything about my supposed levels of skepticallity.

Here's the thing: we have this body called the FDA to watch the "big guys" while nobody goes over what the little guys say but us and likeminded groups.

I'm sure thimerosal is a good thing. They should also start introduce lead and arsenic into the food supply.

Well neither lead nor arsenic are beneficial to us as a vaccine additive. Also they are way worse for you. You do know why thimerosal is used, right? You do realize it is methyl mercury and not ethyl mercury, right?

 

[!Kaggen]

Nope that is your strawman and yes it is stupid.

You were asked what wrong with spending lots of money on vaccines. You responded:

Nothing as long as you spend lots of money on everything else that saves lives.

Thus my post is a completely accurate description of your stated position.

Perhaps you now realize how stupid it is and are trying to distance yourself it.

Nope you still don't get to make a strawman.

I have corrected my stance in your strawman.
Get the difference?

Nothing as long as you spend lots of money on everything else that saves lives.

So if you want to spend a lot of money on one way to save lives, you have to spend lots of money on all every other ways to save lives otherwise there is something wrong with spending lots of money to saves lives using only one way.

 

[!Kaggen]

Exactly. An argument from authority is only a fallacy if the quoted authority has no expertise in the subject in question. Consulting the experts is common sense.

You don't get to redefine the terms to meet your prejudices.

Argument from authority (also known as appeal to authority) is a fallacy of defective induction, where it is argued that a statement is correct because the statement is made by a person or source that is commonly regarded as authoritative. The most general structure of this argument is:

1. Source A says that p is true.
2. Source A is authoritative.
3. Therefore, p is true.

and

There are two basic forms of appeal to authority, based on the authority being trusted. The more relevant the expertise of an authority, the more compelling the argument. Nonetheless, authority is never absolute, so all appeals to authority which assert that the authority is necessarily infallible are fallacious.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

 

[dtugg]

Nope you still don't get to make a strawman.

I have corrected my stance in your strawman.
Get the difference?

Huge difference.

And despite your "corrections" your position is no less stupid.

 

[Sledge]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

So you're appealling to Wikipedia's authority to tell people what appeal to authority means? The irony is delicious, thank you for that.

 

[angrysoba]

Nothing as long as you spend lots of money on everything else that saves lives.

So you object to someone doing something good because it isn't perfect?

Or, in the event you cannot save everyone's life, why save anyone's?

Spening money on vaccines is a waste of time if you don't also spend money on a whole host of other things?

I can't understand the point you are making and I doubt that you even really want to defend it.

 

[Emet]

Actually vaccines don't save lives, that's what the medical system wants you to believe, so they can make more money off of you.

http://www.columbia.edu/itc/hs/pubhealth/rosner/g8965/client_edit/readings/week_2/mckinlay.pdf

“Vaccines didn’t save us” (a.k.a. “vaccines don’t work”): Intellectual dishonesty at its most naked

If there’s one thing about the anti-vaccine movement I’ve learned over the last several years, it’s that it’s almost completely immune to evidence, science, and reason. No matter how much evidence is arrayed against it, its spokespeople always finds a way to spin, distort, or misrepresent the evidence to combat it and not have to give up the concept that vaccines cause autism.

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=4431

 

[Wygram]

From skimming it, it says nothing about the efficacy of vaccines.



Why would I bother, you already deny, despite overwhelming evidence that vaccines save lives.

There is no overwhelming evidence.
And you don't need to skim, just look at the graphs.

 

[angrysoba]

oh great! well that's done then.

For a group of skeptics who use science to back up their claims, you are the actual gullible ones. It's funny that you'd trust and defend a huge corporation that makes billions of dollars, but attack smaller entities and individuals trying to break out what they think is the truth about all this, as nutjobs. Honestly, if you were skeptics, logically you'd be more cautious about the big corporation that could be affecting your life, instead of attacking people that won't affect your life.
This isn't even a society of skeptics, it's a society of blind authority followers, and you just get angry when someone breaks out from what you believe to be right, because you've been told it is.

Okay, so your reasoning here is that smaller entities and individuals don't lie or are less likely too even if they too are peddling their own crank medicines and autism foundations?

There is clearly a form of gullibility that affects those who want to believe such as yourself in the face of the eradication of, say, smallpox and rinderpest and the almost complete eradication of a number of other diseases such as polio.

In fact, vaccinations may actually be the most effective invention in medical history in terms of lives saved. And guess what almost every society has had some form of opposition to some vaccine or another usually for wildly different supposed effects on the body. In the US it's about how the mercury in thimerosol is supposed to cause autism. Whereas in the UK, the MMR which has no thimerosol is supposed to cause it. In Japan, a different MMR vaccine was alleged to cause encephalopathy and was discontinued (even though no link was found). A study in Japan looking at numbers of autistic people found that there was a similar rise in the numbers of autistic people even after the MMR was discontinued. There have no been a number of studies to look at these things such as one in Denmark which found that non-vaccinated children had the same rates of autism as vaccinated children. So, unless it is a vast and incoherent international conspiracy perpetrated by all the various medical practitioners in just about every country in the world then your anti-vaccination nonsense is...nonsense.

But I expect that being one of the "genuine" skeptics you've heard all this before and have an excellent and not at all foolish comeback.

 

[Emet]

If you have an article on antivaxxer nutjobs killing people by encouraging them to not get vaccines your welcome to share. If you also have one on people dying because they didn't get a vaccine you can share that as well.

In South Africa, concerns about MMR, generated by coverage in the rest of the English-speaking world—including the UK—have led to an unwillingness to receive the vaccine, and there has been an outbreak of nearly 7,000 cases of measles. For children with poor health and limited access to medical services, this decision has been disastrous. There have already been hundreds of deaths.

http://www.takepart.com/news/2010/1...n-the-west-harm-heath-in-the-developing-world

 

[Wygram]

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=4431

ARE MOST DISEASES CAUSED BY THE MEDICAL SYSTEM?
By Walter Last

I do not want to pretend that this is an impartial investigation. Instead I am now fully convinced that most diseases are indeed caused by the medical system, and in the following I want to state my reasons for this conclusion.
Increasingly over the years my health beliefs have been turned around. I started out by working as a biochemist and toxicologist in university medical departments fully believing that all these chronic and incurable diseases are indeed incurable and generally of unknown origin, but that pharmaceutical drugs made life easier for patients and often were even curative. My re-education started after immigrating to New Zealand and learning about natural healing and living; this made me realize that disease is mainly caused by unnatural living conditions and can be overcome by natural methods of living and healing.

...

Edited by LashL: 

Snipped for compliance with Rule 4. Do not cut and paste lengthy tracts of material available elsewhere. Instead, just post a short snippet and a link to the other source.

 

[Mashuna]

There are two basic forms of appeal to authority, based on the authority being trusted. The more relevant the expertise of an authority, the more compelling the argument. Nonetheless, authority is never absolute, so all appeals to authority which assert that the authority is necessarily infallible are fallacious.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

So, if we are to accept the wikipedia definition as correct, all you need to do is show where anyone said that their authority was necessarily infallible.

 

[dtugg]

There is no overwhelming evidence.

100% of the evidence supports the fact that vaccines prevent deadly diseases. Anti-vaxxers ignore it because they are notjobs.

And you don't need to skim, just look at the graphs.

Death rates of various diseases got lower as medical technology improved. And?