Anti -Vaxxers movements

What do you think about it? I think that the government should have celebrities advocates to promote the good of vaccines by showing how bad the benefits are from getting a preventable disease.[/FONT]

I think Johnny Depp should be the anti- vaccine sponsor or advocate for having your pet vaccine for rabies.
Don't insult the precious, my precious!:book:
Unfortunately, right now the federal government is led by people who either don't care or feel some sympathy for the anti-vaxxers and other anti-science beliefs.

I think it's worth noting that many celebrities and scientists use their public visibility on social media and in the press to fight for vaccination programs and education. And as long as most of the rest of us support them, we should continue to see most people vaccinated.
When I was a young kid (late 60's), you could still see polio victims clattering around in their braces. It looked so horrible that I looked on vaccinations with relief that they would help me avoid that. No way was I going to skip out on any.

I think that a lot of anti-vaxxer parents are giving in to a vague sense of dread of the vaccines. If they had experienced seeing the results of not being vaccinated earlier, then I wonder if that dread wouldn't have overridden the current one? I suspect that it will take more epidemics before the anti-vaxxers change their hearts.
I don't know. The pseudoscience and propaganda that anti-vaxxers consume on a daily or weekly basis reinforces their erroneous beliefs. The more their convictions are challenged, the more firmly they cling to their convictions. And that's not something unique or peculiar to people who don't believe in vaccinating children. It's basic human nature. We fight for anything we believe in, and it's very hard to get people to change their minds about anything to which they have committed themselves emotionally. Some of the most rational people I know will argue irrationally for beliefs that I consider to be unscientific. And I am sure they could say much the same about me. We don't see our arguments the way others do. So the anti-vaxxers believe they are sharing a truth they wish others would accept. It's the old question of "do evil guys see themselves as bad guys or good guys" question in another form. When people believe they are doing the right thing, why should they do anything else? You have to convince them their belief is wrong, and no one wants to be wrong.
I agree that you can't really reason with them. That's why I suggest that it may take an emotional trigger to make them change. Something like seeing a child suffering through some horrible disease that could have been prevented, and then picturing their own children in that position. I think the success of vaccines in the past has led to some people feeling that those diseases are no longer a threat. Until they experience the threat of disease being greater than the imagined threat of vaccines, they will follow their anti-vaccine feelings.
To play the devil's advocate here, while I'm not familiar with all the claims made by "anti-vaxxers," I do find it profoundly bizarre how much the establishment pushes the flu shot these days. It does kick the paranoid sections of my brain in to high gear. There's absolutely no reason to fear the flu if you're a healthy adult with a functioning immune system. Why are they pushing it so hard? By their own admission, the yearly vaccine is simply their best guess at what strains may be prevalent for the year. Being a virus, it can mutate, rendering your vaccination completely useless.

So while I don't necessarily share the beliefs of the anti vaccination crowd, I'm definitely sympathetic, and I can understand the paranoia. I was just reading about how there are cancer causing chemicals in our drinking water that they're finally getting around to doing something about. You're naive if you think modern government and medicine is completely altruistic. For god's sake, all you have to do is listen to the side effects on any pharmaceutical company's drug commercials these days. It's atrocious that these things make it to market. The fact of the matter is, we're no more than cattle to these people. They don't care one bit at the damage they cause, so long as it's within an "acceptable" margin.

The astounding arrogance and dogmatic acceptance of the anything the majority of the scientific community puts forward is making them their own worst enemy, too. Far too often I see condescending attitudes instead of a real effort to build bridges of understanding.

It's gotten so bad, that a cognitive dissonance has arisen among people. It's plain as day to see there's serious climate change going on, but since so much of the scientific community allowed themselves to be politicized, anything they say is now suspect to some people.
Right after WWI, more people died from Spanish influenza than from the whole war itself. It's the fear of that reoccurring that pushes the health organizations. It would bring the world's health systems to their knees, pretty much making them useless for dealing with anything else. So, it is a big deal to them.

As far as being condescending, I don't buy that. The amount of data and study going into these major health decisions is astounding, and is difficult to summarize in an understandable way. A lot of the decisions are also best guesses, making it even harder to explain. I think it's more of a case of the health authorities not knowing how to explain their decisions in a simple way rather than not feeling they need to.

I understand and share the suspicions about the giant pharmaceutical companies, but I think it's wrong to lump the public health organizations in with them.
rkomar Wrote:I understand and share the suspicions about the giant pharmaceutical companies, but I think it's wrong to lump the public health organizations in with them.

A well made point, and I agree. But when the public health organizations use the pharmaceutical company's products...we're back to where we started.

Again, to be clear, I don't support the anti-vaccination crowd. I don't feel the need to condemn them, either. It is funny that the core argument, a person's right to do what they see fit with their body, is essentially the same as the abortion issue. As a generalization, abortion supporters tend to be liberal, whereas the anti-vaxxers tend to be conservative. Neither here nor there, just an interesting crossover.
The problem with not getting vaccinated is that it also puts others at risk. I'm okay with condemning anyone who does that; that's what condemnation is for.

I didn't know that anti-vaxxers tended to be conservative. As you say, that is interesting. Perhaps they don't fear contagious disease enough because they feel they are protected by God's good grace. It wouldn't be the first time epidemics broke out because of that.
Boomstick Wrote:... There's absolutely no reason to fear the flu if you're a healthy adult with a functioning immune system. Why are they pushing it so hard? By their own admission, the yearly vaccine is simply their best guess at what strains may be prevalent for the year. Being a virus, it can mutate, rendering your vaccination completely useless.

The flu vaccine is far from perfect but even healthy adults should get it every year to reduce the chances they'll spread the virus to people who are less able to survive it. Thousands of people die from the flu in the United States alone every year. It's a very deadly family of diseases and while I agree that the vaccine doesn't do the job we'd like it to do, as someone with a weakened immune system I dread going out in public around sick people. I got the flu shot this year and so far have avoided any major illnesses. But a couple weeks back my wife and I picked up a prescription at our pharmacy and sure enough a very sick guy came and walked by me. I had debated putting on a mask when I went into the pharmacy. At the very least, I wish HE had put a mask on. And we both ended up catching what felt like a strong cold or mild flu. We were only sympomatic for a few days, but it was a scary few days for me. I really don't want another serious respiratory infection.

So while I can understand why healthy adults with strong immune systems don't feel an urgent need to get flu shots, I appreciate it when they do.
I'm with Boomstick. But  'paranoia' is now usually being used as a confusionism to mean any precaution, any health concern, or any safety measure. The real paranoia is on the left because it believes everything is racism, sexism, sexual harassment, or homophobia.

The reason most people support the vaccine culture is that they're getting their information from the vaccine culture...instead of independent sources, which are unbiased and reliable. The ineffectivness of vaccines is shown in several facts. For example, in the number of cases and the case rate (Prevalence of Polio Rates in US, 1910-2010,, which shows there is no correlation between vaccines and the decrease in polio cases, as the figures were already starting to drop from 36,000 cases and a case rate of 35% in '52 to 23,000 and 23% in '54. The Salk vaccine was introduced in '55. The decrease was due to improved nutrition and sanitation, not the vaccine. And US Vital Statistics reports that measles deaths during the 20th c. had already decreased by 99% before the vaccine for it was introduced in 1962 (1200 Studies,, p. 564). And even the mediocre effectiveness of the flu vaccine is exaggerated as officials use statistical manipulation to make it look more effective than it actually is (How Scientists Use Statistical Deception to Fake Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness,

Also, science proves that unvaccinated children are far healthier than vaccinated ones (Studies Prove Without Doubt That Unvaccinated Children Are Far Healthier Than Their Vaccinated Peers, 

And as Dr. Moscowitz asserts (Médecin depuis plus de 50 ans, il déclare: l’hystérie actuelle au sujet de la rougeole ne repose nullement sur la science! -, the vast majority of cases of diseases claimed preventable by a vaccine, in past or recent epidemics, have been observed in 75-95% of cases in vaccinated people. The same is true of recent measles outbreaks in the US, where 95-100% of cases were found in vaccinated individuals. So, even if all non-medical exemptions were eliminated and practically everyone was vaccinated, as would be required by the proposed new laws, similar outbreaks would no doubt continue to occur.

In other words, the claimed immunity conferred by vaccines is a trick and a fake, and "herd immunity", the objective claimed to justify the elimination of human rights and civil liberties, generally linked to a vaccination rate of 95% or more in the case of measles, is an illusion, something vaccination simply can't achieve. Herd immunity, which is used as an excuse to promote vaccination, is a myth, as it would have to be at 90%, but for any given illness only up to 30-40% immunity has been reached (

In addition, scientists have also shown that people vaccinated with live viruses, including the flu, regularly spread them around and were therefore contagious for several weeks.

Moreover, the leading type of Covid vaccine in development is genetic and theoretically will have the probability of integrating into the human genome (The Pros and Cons of Different Vaccines -; Genetic sequencing takes lead in Covid-19 vaccine development -, and is a form of gene therapy but will permanently alter humans genetically in unknown ways, and all such vaccines have ''unintended consequences'' (Altering Human Genetics through Vaccination -, from 2018, referencing the New York Times from 2015, Protection Without a Vaccine). And as such people will be the legal property of Big Pharma. Also, the vaccine might be annual because coronavirus 'immunity' lasts only 3-12 months (A Covid vaccine every year for the rest of your life? - Even worse, it will probably be obligatory, which will be even more dystopian.

The claim by Reuters that it's false is what is false (False claim: a COVID-19 vaccine will genetically modify humans) because tissue has cells, and if the genetic material is injected into a cell it has the potential to go into the nucleus, where it can integrate into human DNA. And the NY Times article does specifically state, ''the prospect of genetically engineering people.'' 

Also, it's being fast-tracked, which will make it even less safe and less effective than usual, in spite of official claims to the contrary by the vaccine culture. 

The fact that vaccines can and do harm and even kill people is recognized by law (National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, introduced in '86 by Ted Kennedy). The rate of serious harm is at 4% in the US (Witnessing the Vaccine Injury Epidemic, Barbara Loe Fisher,; projected world-wide it comes out to about 30 mln. people. The title of the film Mercury Rising, starring Bruce Willis, Miko Hughes, and Kim Dickens, from 1998, by Universal and Imagine, was a nod to the link between vaccines and autism (e.g., Vaccines and autism: a new scientific review  - Sharyl Atkisson - cbsnews. com). 

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. teamed up with Del Bigtree of ICAN (Informed Consent Action Network) to take on the DHHS (Department of Health and Human Services) for vaccine safety violations, and they have won. Their lawsuit has exposed the fact that vaccine safety has been neglected for over 30 years (RFK, Jr. Wins Case Against Government for Vaccine Safety Violations,

It's not about health, it's about profits and the mad, bizarre scheme by totalitarian plutocrats to vaccinate everyone, which the UN had already planned to do (Immunization Agenda 2030, But there are some encouraging signs because vaccine hesitancy appears to be on the rise, the logistics of vaccinating everyone might prove too complex, and there are protests in many cities of the world against the tyranical, criminal, unconstitutional, anti-health, anti-economic Covid measures, measures far worse than any virus. 

Not to mention that Big Pharma, which is organized crime but is now exempt from litigation for vaccine injuries, is responsible for school shootings because of SSRIs, which cause homididal and/or suicidal behaviour in 4% of  patients (I found 16 references for this including the web articles 'Prozac: Panacea or Pandora?' by Dr. Ann Blake-Tracy (doctor of psychology and health sciences, specializing since 20 years in side effects of  serotoninergic medications and is executive director of the International Coalition for Drug Awareness), 'School Shootings Linked to Psychotropic Drugs' - Anti-DepressantFacts, 'Psych Meds Linked to 90% of School Shootings' - WorldNetDaily, 'School Shootings and Psychiatrist Culpability' - Psych Crime, and the book Shooting Drugs-Prozac and its Generation Exposed, Donna Smart, PRI, 2000 (1st ed.), 2004 (2nd ed.)), is guilty of artificially jacking up prices, causing the opioid epidemic, and suppressing remedies (such as the Rife Machine) to continue profiting from disease; was fined on many occasions for various other crimes (but only 13 bln. $ in all, which represents only 3 months in sales); spends more on lobbying efforts than any other industry; and was called a mafia in a report in the '90s, the details of which I don't remember,  ''America's new mafia'' by the Daily Beast, and an MD, addressing NJ Spotlight, lamented that it has "the government and regulators [and also the medical and media establishments] in its pocket" (through bribery, advertizing revenues, and lobbying)(Who Are the Players in the Pharmaceutical Industry (Big Pharma)? -
The reason so many people support the anti-vaxxer view is that they have accepted the blatant lies and propaganda that they have been fed, plain and simple.

There is no "vaccine culture".

Vaccines are the only way to achieve what people inappropriately call "herd immunity". Through vaccines we suppress the spread of disease enough to prevent our hospitals from being overwhelmed.

Relatively few people die from the flu because approximately half the population get the flu shot (in the United States) every year. These shots reduce the severity of the flu for most people, reducing hospitalizations and deaths.

MYCode Guide

Forum Jump: