Thursday, October 1, 2009
Flu Vaccine Bask
Once again I ask (not beg) Free Advice readers for their help: What are the best websites giving pro and con arguments for the H1N1 vaccine? I was on a plane recently next to a woman who oversaw emergency planning for hospitals in San Diego (I think), and she was telling me matter-of-factly that I should get my 4-year-old vaccinated. (We ended up getting into a dispute over the term "inoculation." She was complaining that the government was wasting tons of money making all the hospital staff use one-shot ventilators when treating swine flu cases, and I asked, "If you guys have all been inoculated, why do you need the ventilators?" And she thought I was using the word incorrectly, that I had to use vaccinated instead. Thoughts?)
The problem--as my wife pointed out--is that most of the "go ahead and do it, there's no real danger you moron" websites are all run by the government. On the other hand, there are some anti-vaccine things that I've seen which seem like they might care more about criticizing the government, than they do about my kid's health.
UPDATE: By the way, unless you have actual medical qualifications, please don't tell me what to do in the comments. I understand the general arguments pro and con, but like I said, I haven't seen sources that I trust yet. So especially if you're an anonymous commenter on my blog, your assertions aren't going to make me have someone stick a needle in my kid's arm (after taking him into a waiting room full of sick kids).
The problem--as my wife pointed out--is that most of the "go ahead and do it, there's no real danger you moron" websites are all run by the government. On the other hand, there are some anti-vaccine things that I've seen which seem like they might care more about criticizing the government, than they do about my kid's health.
UPDATE: By the way, unless you have actual medical qualifications, please don't tell me what to do in the comments. I understand the general arguments pro and con, but like I said, I haven't seen sources that I trust yet. So especially if you're an anonymous commenter on my blog, your assertions aren't going to make me have someone stick a needle in my kid's arm (after taking him into a waiting room full of sick kids).
Comments:
what makes you think people with medical qualification can give a better understanding about all this?.umm. would you trust bernanke -he is highly qualified for his profession- with the nation's money?.
doctors like all of us,are humans subject to the same pulls of ideologies and beliefs.i suggest you make the decision yourself,bob
doctors like all of us,are humans subject to the same pulls of ideologies and beliefs.i suggest you make the decision yourself,bob
Dsylexic,
The difference between Bernanke and a medical doctor is that medicine is based on the hard sciences (biology, chemistry, etc.). Economists like bernanke have to set up assumptions for models and their experiment is on people who are not constants.
While I agree you can't take a Doctor's word as gospel (they respond to incentives like the rest of us), the science is a bit more objective then economics. so given Bob's scarcity of time, it makes since to seek advice from someone who has specialized in the kind of labor that Bob has not.
The difference between Bernanke and a medical doctor is that medicine is based on the hard sciences (biology, chemistry, etc.). Economists like bernanke have to set up assumptions for models and their experiment is on people who are not constants.
While I agree you can't take a Doctor's word as gospel (they respond to incentives like the rest of us), the science is a bit more objective then economics. so given Bob's scarcity of time, it makes since to seek advice from someone who has specialized in the kind of labor that Bob has not.
Well I think hearing two different views coming from people with some training in the field is more likely to be informative than hearing two different views coming from people with no training in the field.
# posted by 
: October 1, 2009 at 4:54 AM
: October 1, 2009 at 4:54 AM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1208716/Half-GPs-refuse-swine-flu-vaccine-testing-fears.html
# posted by : October 1, 2009 at 8:33 AM
: October 1, 2009 at 8:33 AM
I work in a hospital in NYS. Gov. Paterson recently signed a law requiring all hospital workers to get the flu vaccine and, probably H1N1 later.
Obviously, I'm not too thrilled about this.
I don't even see patients, after all, I'm in research.
Obviously, I'm not too thrilled about this.
I don't even see patients, after all, I'm in research.
Why bother? Australia and New Zealand have just come out of their flu season, H1N1 was widespread and through the whole season, no vaccine was available. I don't think there is any evidence the flu death toll there this southern winter was any higher than any other year. In fact, it was probably lower.
"Every year in Australia, flu typically causes about 2500 deaths, 10 per cent of all absences from work due to illness, 80,000 GP visits and 15,000 hospitalisations..."
(source).
This year's H1N1 death toll in Australia = 128 (source)
(source).
This year's H1N1 death toll in Australia = 128 (source)
The Blackadder Says:
Here is a Q & A site from the Mayo Clinic. Not sure if this is what you are looking for or not.
Here is a Q & A site from the Mayo Clinic. Not sure if this is what you are looking for or not.
# posted by : October 1, 2009 at 11:10 AM
: October 1, 2009 at 11:10 AM
You should make out with someone who has H1N1, that will make you safe from it and immune to future flu viruses.
What? Don't, don't be all, discriminatin against me just because I'm an anonymous internet poster. I can read captchas just as well as you!
What? Don't, don't be all, discriminatin against me just because I'm an anonymous internet poster. I can read captchas just as well as you!
# posted by : October 1, 2009 at 11:17 AM
: October 1, 2009 at 11:17 AM
Bob - I would check out the material put out by Weston Price. They are against all vaccines in general and are not exactly what you are looking for, but they have solid research and ideas to back up their beliefs. Sally Fallon is my favorite.
# posted by : October 1, 2009 at 11:34 AM
: October 1, 2009 at 11:34 AM
In answer to your parenthetical question, according to Wiki: "Today the terms inoculation, vaccination and immunisation are used more or less interchangeably and popularly refer to the process of artificial induction of immunity against various infectious diseases."
# posted by : October 1, 2009 at 12:20 PM
: October 1, 2009 at 12:20 PM
michael,
i beg to disagree that medicine is based on hard sciences.diagnosis is an art as much as it is a science.also,btw, you are probably referring to allopathy when you say 'medicine'.alternative systems of healthcare including chinese medicine and indian ayurveda have stood the test of time for thousands of years. i am not saying that they are the panacea one is looking for,but if you keep an open mind,it is clear that 'allopathy' is just one more way of approaching illnesses.it is as much an ideology as the others.
i beg to disagree that medicine is based on hard sciences.diagnosis is an art as much as it is a science.also,btw, you are probably referring to allopathy when you say 'medicine'.alternative systems of healthcare including chinese medicine and indian ayurveda have stood the test of time for thousands of years. i am not saying that they are the panacea one is looking for,but if you keep an open mind,it is clear that 'allopathy' is just one more way of approaching illnesses.it is as much an ideology as the others.
Dsylexic: your use of the term 'allopathy' clearly shows you are a fan of homeopathy - the most absurd of quackeries. Once upon a time homeopathy seemed like a good idea, but then Mr. Avogadro came along and it's been downhill ever since.
There is no alternative medicine - just as there is no such thing as alternative physics. There are competing medical theories, maybe, just as there are competing physical theories.
Fortunately, medicine is an empirical science and as such it is possible to test competing hypothesis. IF homeopathy or ‘Chinese’ medicine worked, Bayer, Hoechst, and Co. would have long since patented the hell out of it and marketed it to the hilt. After all, they are not suppressing antibiotics, are they?
Bob, I think that group theoretically speaking, vaccination is a subset of inoculation. So, you can't go wrong when you use the term inoculation. It covers it all.
There is no alternative medicine - just as there is no such thing as alternative physics. There are competing medical theories, maybe, just as there are competing physical theories.
Fortunately, medicine is an empirical science and as such it is possible to test competing hypothesis. IF homeopathy or ‘Chinese’ medicine worked, Bayer, Hoechst, and Co. would have long since patented the hell out of it and marketed it to the hilt. After all, they are not suppressing antibiotics, are they?
Bob, I think that group theoretically speaking, vaccination is a subset of inoculation. So, you can't go wrong when you use the term inoculation. It covers it all.
# posted by : October 1, 2009 at 2:29 PM
: October 1, 2009 at 2:29 PM
On vaccination – the biggest risk of vaccination is that the vaccine in question does not work. The next biggest thing is that the vaccine in question actually triggers the disease (possible with live vaccines). Then comes the plain dumb luck factor of immediate adverse reaction to the protein that was part of the growth culture. Also, there is a risk that while the body is reacting to the vaccine it does not have enough resources left to deal with another infection – and you get sick of something really stupid simply because the timing was unfortunate. I would think that most immunologists would see these as probably the most serious risks. The link between autism and vaccines is bogus.
Also, to think the government would deliberately inflict a dangerous substance on the general population is a little paranoid. The government may overreact, may act based on faulty information, or may simply go about it in a completely nutty way – but a challenge anyone to provide evidence where a government has DELIBERATELY put the health of its loyal subjects at risk. That just wouldn’t make any sense.
Also, to think the government would deliberately inflict a dangerous substance on the general population is a little paranoid. The government may overreact, may act based on faulty information, or may simply go about it in a completely nutty way – but a challenge anyone to provide evidence where a government has DELIBERATELY put the health of its loyal subjects at risk. That just wouldn’t make any sense.
# posted by : October 1, 2009 at 2:36 PM
: October 1, 2009 at 2:36 PM
ETW: agreed. I think it's hyped. Self-reinforcing cycle of hysteria.
# posted by : October 1, 2009 at 2:37 PM
: October 1, 2009 at 2:37 PM
Bob,
You have probably seen this, but Murray Rothbard offers some words to the wise in this 1989 video reguarding, yep you guessed it....the swine flu.
(Fast forward to 50:53):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONS33ukkTtE
You have probably seen this, but Murray Rothbard offers some words to the wise in this 1989 video reguarding, yep you guessed it....the swine flu.
(Fast forward to 50:53):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONS33ukkTtE
i work at both a hospital and the fda. in general i'm against flu vaccines. in the specific case of the h1n1 vaccine, there is no way i'd get that one. for someone in good general health the rick/benefit analysis leans heavily towards avoiding this hastily researched, developed, manufactured and (fda) approved product. in fact, it probably leans even more heavily against it if you're in poor health.
# posted by : October 2, 2009 at 1:07 AM
: October 2, 2009 at 1:07 AM
rothfield,
no sir. i have never tried homeopathy.i am an indian and i know that ayurveda works.ayurveda is traditional indian medicine if you are unaware.
ayurveda is a system of curing illnesses.it isnt a drug that can be patented.
so there,dont ascribe conspiracy theories to me.
obviously there is no alternative physics.not so in medicine.i know you have been raised in the western world and your knowledge of the outside world is limited,but there is no need for the rest of the world to accept western medicine as the last word on health.psychiatry that magical western invention is a quackery if there was one,but hey that didnt prevent them from awarding MDs
no sir. i have never tried homeopathy.i am an indian and i know that ayurveda works.ayurveda is traditional indian medicine if you are unaware.
ayurveda is a system of curing illnesses.it isnt a drug that can be patented.
so there,dont ascribe conspiracy theories to me.
obviously there is no alternative physics.not so in medicine.i know you have been raised in the western world and your knowledge of the outside world is limited,but there is no need for the rest of the world to accept western medicine as the last word on health.psychiatry that magical western invention is a quackery if there was one,but hey that didnt prevent them from awarding MDs
rothfield,
no sir. i have never tried homeopathy.i am an indian and i know that ayurveda works.ayurveda is traditional indian medicine if you are unaware.
ayurveda is a system of curing illnesses.it isnt a drug that can be patented.
so there,dont ascribe conspiracy theories to me.
obviously there is no alternative physics.not so in medicine.i know you have been raised in the western world and your knowledge of the outside world is limited,but there is no need for the rest of the world to accept western medicine as the last word on health.psychiatry that magical western invention is a quackery if there was one,but hey that didnt prevent them from awarding MDs
no sir. i have never tried homeopathy.i am an indian and i know that ayurveda works.ayurveda is traditional indian medicine if you are unaware.
ayurveda is a system of curing illnesses.it isnt a drug that can be patented.
so there,dont ascribe conspiracy theories to me.
obviously there is no alternative physics.not so in medicine.i know you have been raised in the western world and your knowledge of the outside world is limited,but there is no need for the rest of the world to accept western medicine as the last word on health.psychiatry that magical western invention is a quackery if there was one,but hey that didnt prevent them from awarding MDs
"IF homeopathy or ‘Chinese’ medicine worked, Bayer, Hoechst, and Co. would have long since patented the hell out of it and marketed it to the hilt."
James, I think precisely the reason why Western pharmaceutical cos have shied from investigating Chinese herbal medicine is that our systems make it difficult to patent such compounds or their component chemicals.
See:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/117991914/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0
James, I think precisely the reason why Western pharmaceutical cos have shied from investigating Chinese herbal medicine is that our systems make it difficult to patent such compounds or their component chemicals.
See:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/117991914/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0
Speaking as someone who works with doctors, you have way too much faith in them. I know western cultural beliefs tell you to trust them as godlike in their judgement, but that's an illusion you need to disabuse yourself.
The sickness industry I'm part of is as succumbed to money as any other. Do not be deceived by the halo effect that surrounds the industry for those unfamiliar with it.
The sickness industry I'm part of is as succumbed to money as any other. Do not be deceived by the halo effect that surrounds the industry for those unfamiliar with it.
# posted by : October 2, 2009 at 5:29 AM
: October 2, 2009 at 5:29 AM
"what makes you think people with medical qualification can give a better understanding about all this?"
Right. Better ask a witch doctor instead.
Right. Better ask a witch doctor instead.
Bob, check out the website for The Vaccine Book by Dr. Sears. Although he is pro-vax, he always does a great job of compiling and laying out the facts.
The important, and frustrating, thing to remember is that there is no right answer. You have to decide whether the risk and severity of the disease outweighs that of the vaccination.
The important, and frustrating, thing to remember is that there is no right answer. You have to decide whether the risk and severity of the disease outweighs that of the vaccination.
# posted by : October 2, 2009 at 9:05 AM
: October 2, 2009 at 9:05 AM
"Dsylexic: your use of the term 'allopathy' clearly shows you are a fan of homeopathy..."
James, you're use of 'clearly shows' clearly shows you are a moron.
James, you're use of 'clearly shows' clearly shows you are a moron.
# posted by : October 2, 2009 at 9:05 AM
: October 2, 2009 at 9:05 AM
'You have probably seen this, but Murray Rothbard offers some words to the wise in this 1989 video reguarding, yep you guessed it....the swine flu.'
Now, there is a medical authority for you.
Now, there is a medical authority for you.
# posted by : October 2, 2009 at 9:07 AM
: October 2, 2009 at 9:07 AM
TT, much of our medical arsenal is plant-based; pharmaceutical companies are scouring the world for novel phytochemicals with medical properties. Yes, it is not possible to patent a whole plant - though it is being tride - but the whole plant is generally not what is needed. What is needed are the chemical compounds in the plant, and what the big pharmas are doing is trying to isolate those that are needed for medical effectiveness, where possible synthesize them, and patent the process/product. It's big, big money, and its happening now.
Much of 'Chinese' and 'Ayurvedic' medicine is hocus-pocus, but some of the substances they use are quite effective. Native Americans figured out the medical properties of quinine, and it's been widely used ever since. Willow bark extracts have been used for centuries in curing fevers, long before aspirin was developed in its current form.
Probably the most successful phytochemical in use today is opium and its derivatives. Nobody challenges the efficacy of opium, and there’s a lot of money in it.
And patenting alone is not the only way to protect a market for the big pharmas – there’s always government regulation that could turn a really effective substance into a controlled substance, making it illegal for anybody but the licensed monopolists to distribute it.
Also, does anybody really want to argue that ALL scientists and researchers are in a conspiracy to cover up the effectiveness of these medical substances? One would have to be extremely delusional to think so.
Much of 'Chinese' and 'Ayurvedic' medicine is hocus-pocus, but some of the substances they use are quite effective. Native Americans figured out the medical properties of quinine, and it's been widely used ever since. Willow bark extracts have been used for centuries in curing fevers, long before aspirin was developed in its current form.
Probably the most successful phytochemical in use today is opium and its derivatives. Nobody challenges the efficacy of opium, and there’s a lot of money in it.
And patenting alone is not the only way to protect a market for the big pharmas – there’s always government regulation that could turn a really effective substance into a controlled substance, making it illegal for anybody but the licensed monopolists to distribute it.
Also, does anybody really want to argue that ALL scientists and researchers are in a conspiracy to cover up the effectiveness of these medical substances? One would have to be extremely delusional to think so.
# posted by : October 2, 2009 at 10:03 AM
: October 2, 2009 at 10:03 AM
Much of 'Chinese' and 'Ayurvedic' medicine is hocus-pocus
wow.that sentence is the killer combo. arrogance and ignorance.
@witch doctor comment. well,no,we should ask economists.since they know signalling theory,they would be able to predict why withces want to promote flu shots
wow.that sentence is the killer combo. arrogance and ignorance.
@witch doctor comment. well,no,we should ask economists.since they know signalling theory,they would be able to predict why withces want to promote flu shots
Just noticed this, Dsylexic:
"you're use of 'clearly shows' clearly shows you are a moron."
Bad grammar & recursive logic... Back to you;)
Ok, here's the deal: If I agree to only ever use Western medicine for anything that ails me, will you agree to only ever use Ayurvedic?
I always thought it would be neat if practitioners of 'allopathy' all agreed never to treat practitioners of 'alternative medicine' (and the 'alternatives' are more than welcome to not treat the 'allopaths').
That should solve the problem within less than two generations.
"you're use of 'clearly shows' clearly shows you are a moron."
Bad grammar & recursive logic... Back to you;)
Ok, here's the deal: If I agree to only ever use Western medicine for anything that ails me, will you agree to only ever use Ayurvedic?
I always thought it would be neat if practitioners of 'allopathy' all agreed never to treat practitioners of 'alternative medicine' (and the 'alternatives' are more than welcome to not treat the 'allopaths').
That should solve the problem within less than two generations.
# posted by : October 2, 2009 at 1:40 PM
: October 2, 2009 at 1:40 PM
James Rothfeld,
Condescension from a position of ignorance probably isn't the best formula for winning an argument. The term "allopathic" is widely used among MDs, researchers, et al to distinguish Western medicine from what's commonly referred to as "alternative" medicine. The fact that the term was coined by a homeopath is irrelevant.
I work in medical research and I can tell you that alternative medicine is gaining more acceptance among MDs all the time. For example, you would be hard-pressed to find a pain clinic that doesn't offer acupuncture. In the real world, most allopathic providers no longer see alternative medicine as a threat but rather view it as something to learn from and something which can supplement Western medical practices.
Your antagonistic approach is naive, uninformed, and generally counter-productive.
Condescension from a position of ignorance probably isn't the best formula for winning an argument. The term "allopathic" is widely used among MDs, researchers, et al to distinguish Western medicine from what's commonly referred to as "alternative" medicine. The fact that the term was coined by a homeopath is irrelevant.
I work in medical research and I can tell you that alternative medicine is gaining more acceptance among MDs all the time. For example, you would be hard-pressed to find a pain clinic that doesn't offer acupuncture. In the real world, most allopathic providers no longer see alternative medicine as a threat but rather view it as something to learn from and something which can supplement Western medical practices.
Your antagonistic approach is naive, uninformed, and generally counter-productive.
# posted by : October 2, 2009 at 4:31 PM
: October 2, 2009 at 4:31 PM
Caveman,
You correctly feel that “Condescension from a position of ignorance probably isn't the best formula for winning an argument,” which is why I would think you should tread carefully.
Your first obvious error is the claim that the term allopathic is widely accepted and used as self-description by real medical scientists:
I refer to the glorious wisdom of wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allopathic_medicine
Your description of the term does not begin to even resemble the real-world usage of it. Regarding the doings of MDs, it should be kept in mind that Medical Doctors are not trained as scientists, do not conduct research, and would be hard-pressed to explain what a double-blind experiment is, not to mention discuss their role, strengths, and weaknesses. MD training creates mostly glorified plumbers of the human body. MDs come up with all kinds of crazy nonsense all the time, such as Atkins diet. I have met MDs who prescribe magnets for pain therapy, who integrate homeopathy into their practice, and who analyse biorhythms as part of their diagnostic process.
I'm sure that acupuncture is widely used – not only because of the powerful placebo effect, but also because it is one of those quackeries that seem to have at least some measurable effect, sometimes.
You may claim to work in medical research, but that’s neither here nor there. I could just as well claim to have a PhD in pharmacology. In the anonymous free-for-all of the blogosphere, self-claimed titles, affiliations, or acquaintances ain’t worth much.
You correctly feel that “Condescension from a position of ignorance probably isn't the best formula for winning an argument,” which is why I would think you should tread carefully.
Your first obvious error is the claim that the term allopathic is widely accepted and used as self-description by real medical scientists:
I refer to the glorious wisdom of wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allopathic_medicine
Your description of the term does not begin to even resemble the real-world usage of it. Regarding the doings of MDs, it should be kept in mind that Medical Doctors are not trained as scientists, do not conduct research, and would be hard-pressed to explain what a double-blind experiment is, not to mention discuss their role, strengths, and weaknesses. MD training creates mostly glorified plumbers of the human body. MDs come up with all kinds of crazy nonsense all the time, such as Atkins diet. I have met MDs who prescribe magnets for pain therapy, who integrate homeopathy into their practice, and who analyse biorhythms as part of their diagnostic process.
I'm sure that acupuncture is widely used – not only because of the powerful placebo effect, but also because it is one of those quackeries that seem to have at least some measurable effect, sometimes.
You may claim to work in medical research, but that’s neither here nor there. I could just as well claim to have a PhD in pharmacology. In the anonymous free-for-all of the blogosphere, self-claimed titles, affiliations, or acquaintances ain’t worth much.
# posted by : October 2, 2009 at 6:28 PM
: October 2, 2009 at 6:28 PM
James,
I only mention my profession because as someone who works in the field I know how the term "allopathic" is used. It's cute, though, that you think linking to the wikipedia article is an effective rebuttal.
If you want to argue that "if it isn't Republic of Science approved, it isn't valid," there's probably nothing I can say to change your mind.
I only mention my profession because as someone who works in the field I know how the term "allopathic" is used. It's cute, though, that you think linking to the wikipedia article is an effective rebuttal.
If you want to argue that "if it isn't Republic of Science approved, it isn't valid," there's probably nothing I can say to change your mind.
# posted by : October 2, 2009 at 9:13 PM
: October 2, 2009 at 9:13 PM
Caveman,
nomen est omen.
You have all the prattle of the alternative down pat.
It's easy to change my mind, about anything really - evidence and logic is all that's needed.
Provide me with a reference in a standard medical journal, for example, where the world allopathic is uesd as a normal description for normal medicine, and I'm going to change my tune very quickly.
Cheers.
nomen est omen.
You have all the prattle of the alternative down pat.
It's easy to change my mind, about anything really - evidence and logic is all that's needed.
Provide me with a reference in a standard medical journal, for example, where the world allopathic is uesd as a normal description for normal medicine, and I'm going to change my tune very quickly.
Cheers.
# posted by : October 2, 2009 at 11:00 PM
: October 2, 2009 at 11:00 PM
Caveman, when James has his mind made up, DO NOT try to confuse him with facts!
# posted by : October 2, 2009 at 11:17 PM
: October 2, 2009 at 11:17 PM
"you're use of 'clearly shows' clearly shows you are a moron."
Bad grammar & recursive logic... Back to you;)
James,I never made that comment.please read the comments again.it was somebody anonymous.
Ok, here's the deal: If I agree to only ever use Western medicine for anything that ails me, will you agree to only ever use Ayurvedic?
sorry mate,you are addressing the wrong issue here.all i am saying is that western medicine is not the last word on healthcare.i never said allopathy doesnt work.
you are being dogmatic when you say that only your version of the truth is the truth.pretty non-libertarian,i'd say.
btw,there are millions of people totally suspicious of allopathy and totally eschewing it.
no big deal there.
Bad grammar & recursive logic... Back to you;)
James,I never made that comment.please read the comments again.it was somebody anonymous.
Ok, here's the deal: If I agree to only ever use Western medicine for anything that ails me, will you agree to only ever use Ayurvedic?
sorry mate,you are addressing the wrong issue here.all i am saying is that western medicine is not the last word on healthcare.i never said allopathy doesnt work.
you are being dogmatic when you say that only your version of the truth is the truth.pretty non-libertarian,i'd say.
btw,there are millions of people totally suspicious of allopathy and totally eschewing it.
no big deal there.
Dsylexic, you say: "you are being dogmatic when you say that only your version of the truth is the truth.pretty non-libertarian,i'd say."
That's funny. There's nothing about libertarian thought that makes it necessary for libertarians to be tolerant. All that is required is not to resort to physical violence to have one's way.
Also, I am not claiming that my version is the last word on what's factual and what's not. I'm only saying that YOUR version is certainly not. Big difference.
Every time you use the word 'allopatic' to describe normal medicine as if that was a generally accepted term, you expose yourself as scientifically illiterate and completely out of touch with the common usage of terms.
Proof? Simple: there is a "Journal of Ayurvedic Medicine", there is a "Journal of Homeopathic Medicine", there is even a "Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine". There is not, however, a "Journal of Allopathic Medicine". Why not? Because the term "allopathic" is a derogatory term invented by Hahnemann, and to this day is only used by 'alternatives' (vulgo: quacks) to attack medicine.
Regarding the real millions of people eschewing medicine (what you call 'allopatic') - I don't give two hoots. Millions of people think Communism is a good idea. So what? Millions, if not billions, think there's something to astrology, and almost 90% of all humanity believe in deities of one type or another.
Reality is not a democratic process.
From my perspective, Communism, Astrology, and Theism are foolish conceits of uneducated, or at least badly educated, minds. If you think that's being intolerant and condescending, I can only say - hell, yeah. What else do you expect me to be or do? Praise or incorporate these destructive memes?
That's funny. There's nothing about libertarian thought that makes it necessary for libertarians to be tolerant. All that is required is not to resort to physical violence to have one's way.
Also, I am not claiming that my version is the last word on what's factual and what's not. I'm only saying that YOUR version is certainly not. Big difference.
Every time you use the word 'allopatic' to describe normal medicine as if that was a generally accepted term, you expose yourself as scientifically illiterate and completely out of touch with the common usage of terms.
Proof? Simple: there is a "Journal of Ayurvedic Medicine", there is a "Journal of Homeopathic Medicine", there is even a "Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine". There is not, however, a "Journal of Allopathic Medicine". Why not? Because the term "allopathic" is a derogatory term invented by Hahnemann, and to this day is only used by 'alternatives' (vulgo: quacks) to attack medicine.
Regarding the real millions of people eschewing medicine (what you call 'allopatic') - I don't give two hoots. Millions of people think Communism is a good idea. So what? Millions, if not billions, think there's something to astrology, and almost 90% of all humanity believe in deities of one type or another.
Reality is not a democratic process.
From my perspective, Communism, Astrology, and Theism are foolish conceits of uneducated, or at least badly educated, minds. If you think that's being intolerant and condescending, I can only say - hell, yeah. What else do you expect me to be or do? Praise or incorporate these destructive memes?
# posted by : October 3, 2009 at 12:24 PM
: October 3, 2009 at 12:24 PM
you win mate. i dont want to use RPM's blog to carry on a meaningless argument over the internet.enjoy your flu shot.
plus your version of the truth comes certified by journal publishing academics.cant argue with that.
plus your version of the truth comes certified by journal publishing academics.cant argue with that.
Dsylexic:
at last you admit it: my "version of the truth comes certified by journal publishing academics.cant argue with that."
Too bad you're being sarcastic.
at last you admit it: my "version of the truth comes certified by journal publishing academics.cant argue with that."
Too bad you're being sarcastic.
# posted by : October 3, 2009 at 5:14 PM
: October 3, 2009 at 5:14 PM
No, it is certainly not based on personal experience. Just as I don't know from personal experience that eating deadly nightshade is in fact bad for my health.
http://www.atkinsexposed.org/
Help yourself.
http://www.atkinsexposed.org/
Help yourself.
# posted by : October 4, 2009 at 1:38 AM
: October 4, 2009 at 1:38 AM
TO MR. MURPHY PART 2
We truly believe that we either dig our graves with our teeth, or eat ourselves to excellent health, depending on the food and nutrition we choose.
We recently watched a couple of very inspiring documentaries on nutritional healing which have had an amazing rate of success in healing otherwise scary diseases such as cancer and the lot. The experts and doctors highlighted in these documentaries have given us the impetus to even eat way more healthy than we have been in the past. It goes without saying that an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure. The intake of the right foods does a fabulous job towards preventing us catching diseases and/or flu's going round.
You asked whether there was a website that would be worth checking out. I believe one that would not be disappointing to you would be the contrarian "Health Ranger". His website is called http://www.naturalnews.com
His very informative newsletters have been carrying articles on the swine flu topic and other vaccines lately. Here are few links:
http://www.naturalnews.com/027178_vaccines_autism_NaturalPedia.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/027175_vaccines_autism_chemicals.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/027188_NaturalNews_cancer_cervical_cancer.html
Before closing, there are two more thoughts I would like to share with you, and that is the recent cervical cancer vaccine that resulted in the death of a teenage girl a few days ago, immediately after being vaccinated. Today, another case was reported of a girl that ended up with massive brain damage, and who is now severely handicapped.( see links above)
The other point, since you have Christian convictions, I thought you might find interesting, is the relationship between the Amish and autism. As you may, or may not know, there is a large volume of research and evidence that indicates that the cause of the rise in autism is directly related to the rise in vaccinations. The Amish, who for the most part do not vaccinate, also have very little incidence of autism.
And with that I hope I have been of some service.
Riekus de Poel
We truly believe that we either dig our graves with our teeth, or eat ourselves to excellent health, depending on the food and nutrition we choose.
We recently watched a couple of very inspiring documentaries on nutritional healing which have had an amazing rate of success in healing otherwise scary diseases such as cancer and the lot. The experts and doctors highlighted in these documentaries have given us the impetus to even eat way more healthy than we have been in the past. It goes without saying that an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure. The intake of the right foods does a fabulous job towards preventing us catching diseases and/or flu's going round.
You asked whether there was a website that would be worth checking out. I believe one that would not be disappointing to you would be the contrarian "Health Ranger". His website is called http://www.naturalnews.com
His very informative newsletters have been carrying articles on the swine flu topic and other vaccines lately. Here are few links:
http://www.naturalnews.com/027178_vaccines_autism_NaturalPedia.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/027175_vaccines_autism_chemicals.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/027188_NaturalNews_cancer_cervical_cancer.html
Before closing, there are two more thoughts I would like to share with you, and that is the recent cervical cancer vaccine that resulted in the death of a teenage girl a few days ago, immediately after being vaccinated. Today, another case was reported of a girl that ended up with massive brain damage, and who is now severely handicapped.( see links above)
The other point, since you have Christian convictions, I thought you might find interesting, is the relationship between the Amish and autism. As you may, or may not know, there is a large volume of research and evidence that indicates that the cause of the rise in autism is directly related to the rise in vaccinations. The Amish, who for the most part do not vaccinate, also have very little incidence of autism.
And with that I hope I have been of some service.
Riekus de Poel
# posted by : October 7, 2009 at 9:52 AM
: October 7, 2009 at 9:52 AM
TO MR. MURPHY PART 1
Dear Mr. Murphy,
The issue seems to be "to vaccinate or not to vaccinate". As far as vaccination in concerned, I do not have much experience. As far as NOT vaccinating, I have a fair bit. Being a father of five, and a grandfather of one, the accumulated years of having parented my non-vaccinated children amounts to a total of 113 years. So this gives us (my wife and I) some experience.
Having lived in countries that at first glance may not necessarily be looked upon as first world, like India, Nepal, Syria and Turkey, where hygiene standards are not always the way you'd wish them to be, we have nevertheless never wavered in our stance against vaccinations of all sorts.
I think it is only logical to view the swine flu vaccine within the bigger picture of vaccinations of all sorts, simply because there is very little research to dig up on the present swine flu strain/scare, neither has the stuff been tested properly and there isn't much information available on the repercussions and consequences of this particular shot simply because it is yet to go online full scale in the population at large.
However, if you do research on the ongoing vaccination programs that have been in place for decades, there is more info than time permits to read. It is this research that gave us as parents the unshakable conviction to not poison our children or unnecessarily put them in harms way. We have never regretted this decision. Our kids have always prospered in very good health. ( All born in India and Nepal) We have always tried to eat decent, non-junk foods, shopping at the local markets, avoiding white sugar, softdrinks, white starches,etc. and sticking to the more natural grains for a healthy diet. It's not that our kids have never come down with anything. Four of the five had chicken pox when they were little. But for the rest, we have been blessed with good health, to stay away as far as possible from doctors, medicine and hospitals. Except for a broken bone here and there.
One interesting tidbit here is that we recently took our daughter who was pregnant, for a dental check up, here in Damascus. She never had any dental work done previously. After examination, the dentist said that if everybody had teeth like these, then dentists could all stay home!
From Riekus de Poel
CONTINUED IN PART 2
Dear Mr. Murphy,
The issue seems to be "to vaccinate or not to vaccinate". As far as vaccination in concerned, I do not have much experience. As far as NOT vaccinating, I have a fair bit. Being a father of five, and a grandfather of one, the accumulated years of having parented my non-vaccinated children amounts to a total of 113 years. So this gives us (my wife and I) some experience.
Having lived in countries that at first glance may not necessarily be looked upon as first world, like India, Nepal, Syria and Turkey, where hygiene standards are not always the way you'd wish them to be, we have nevertheless never wavered in our stance against vaccinations of all sorts.
I think it is only logical to view the swine flu vaccine within the bigger picture of vaccinations of all sorts, simply because there is very little research to dig up on the present swine flu strain/scare, neither has the stuff been tested properly and there isn't much information available on the repercussions and consequences of this particular shot simply because it is yet to go online full scale in the population at large.
However, if you do research on the ongoing vaccination programs that have been in place for decades, there is more info than time permits to read. It is this research that gave us as parents the unshakable conviction to not poison our children or unnecessarily put them in harms way. We have never regretted this decision. Our kids have always prospered in very good health. ( All born in India and Nepal) We have always tried to eat decent, non-junk foods, shopping at the local markets, avoiding white sugar, softdrinks, white starches,etc. and sticking to the more natural grains for a healthy diet. It's not that our kids have never come down with anything. Four of the five had chicken pox when they were little. But for the rest, we have been blessed with good health, to stay away as far as possible from doctors, medicine and hospitals. Except for a broken bone here and there.
One interesting tidbit here is that we recently took our daughter who was pregnant, for a dental check up, here in Damascus. She never had any dental work done previously. After examination, the dentist said that if everybody had teeth like these, then dentists could all stay home!
From Riekus de Poel
CONTINUED IN PART 2
# posted by : October 7, 2009 at 9:55 AM
: October 7, 2009 at 9:55 AM
"It is this research that gave us as parents the unshakable conviction to not poison our children..."
Vaccines are not "poisons". They are dead or weakened versions of the germ involved in the illness, about which you will have little say as to whether or not your child ingests it.
"we have been blessed with good health"
That's very nice. And means absolutely nothing by itself. George Burns smoked cigars and drank everyday and lived to ~100 in good health. Do you give your children cigars and liquor every day?
"that is the recent cervical cancer vaccine that resulted in the death of a teenage girl a few days ago, immediately after being vaccinated."
So, you're suggesting that, from the vaccine, she immediately developed and died from cancer!? And can you explain exactly why, when the disease itself doesn't kill you from cancer in a few days, an injection of the weakened microbes causing the disease will cause cancer?
I think I"m due back on earth now.
Post a Comment
Vaccines are not "poisons". They are dead or weakened versions of the germ involved in the illness, about which you will have little say as to whether or not your child ingests it.
"we have been blessed with good health"
That's very nice. And means absolutely nothing by itself. George Burns smoked cigars and drank everyday and lived to ~100 in good health. Do you give your children cigars and liquor every day?
"that is the recent cervical cancer vaccine that resulted in the death of a teenage girl a few days ago, immediately after being vaccinated."
So, you're suggesting that, from the vaccine, she immediately developed and died from cancer!? And can you explain exactly why, when the disease itself doesn't kill you from cancer in a few days, an injection of the weakened microbes causing the disease will cause cancer?
I think I"m due back on earth now.
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]