Credentials needed for health discussions?

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AutomaticMonkey

Quote: AZDuffman

Haven't seen anything on it. "Multiple vaccines" could mean anything. My thought is this happens regular but this is the time you choose to notice and think the world is ending because of it? When you see news like this one should ask themselves, "compared to what?" How many vaccines are being removed vs. how many are there in total? Are they for things we do not need to vax for, like old flu strains or smallpox?

Sounds like business as usual to me.
link to original post

I guess that could be another possibility for societal collapse or extinction- an unintentional iatrogenic genocide.

I'm not looking for any trouble so I'm not going to express it in terms of any current real-world concerns, but suppose there was some universally applied medical intervention, that was believed to be harmless, but there is no substitute for time and in time it proved to be deadly and sterilizing to all those who took it.

This thought came to me when I read that there was a negative correlation between having had chickenpox and developing brain cancer. Given a choice between those two things, I think I'll take my chances with chickenpox! But now they vaccinate for chickenpox. Given that correlation, are you sure you want to do that?

The microbes that are endemic to a species evolved with that species, and there's generally some kind of symbiotic relationship. Like our gut bacteria. We can't live without those for very long. And who knows what those little bugs in our eyelashes do, maybe they keep us from going blind or something? Trying to hack nature (especially evolution) is risky business. We should do this slowly and thoughtfully.
link to original post

If such a medical intervention had the sort of adverse effect you mentioned, medical scientists and public health experts would be all over it.

As for chickenpox versus vaccination, what is the comparison of the incidence of brain cancer in the vaccinated versus unvaccinated compared the risk of death in the vaccinated versus the unvaccinated?
link to original post

Chickenpox was always just a thing you got. Discomfort for about a week then over it. In my day parents had "chickenpox parties" if a kid was known to have it so the others would get it. Because it was better to get it young than as an adult where there could be complications. Risk of death? Pretty close to zero.
link to original post

We had chicken pox parties way back in the day because we didn't have a vaccine, and chicken pox was a disease of the youth. Those youths suffered greatly, often at risk of permanent disfigurement due to the pox and at risk of death. The vaccine changed all that. The vaccine reduced the suffering of today's youths, drastically reduced the risk of permanent disfigurement and reduced deaths by 97%. There is no disease I can think of where it's better to contact the disease versus getting the vaccine.
link to original post

Disfigurement? Maybe you had a few scars, not a big deal. As to death, I cannot recall ever hearing of anyone who got it in childhood dying. You itched like crazy, in a week it was over.
link to original post

In all seriousness, can you tell us your expert credentials on this topic? Are you a physician, nurse practitioner or physician's assistant? Do you have a degree in pharmacy, nursing or biology? Do you have formal and credentialed education in medical epidemiology or bio-statistics? Are you a virologist or microbiologist? What expertise do you have that make your comments credible?

Quote: AutomaticMonkey

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AZDuffman

Chickenpox was always just a thing you got. Discomfort for about a week then over it. In my day parents had "chickenpox parties" if a kid was known to have it so the others would get it. Because it was better to get it young than as an adult where there could be complications. Risk of death? Pretty close to zero.
link to original post

We had chicken pox parties way back in the day because we didn't have a vaccine, and chicken pox was a disease of the youth. Those youths suffered greatly, often at risk of permanent disfigurement due to the pox and at risk of death. The vaccine changed all that. The vaccine reduced the suffering of today's youths, drastically reduced the risk of permanent disfigurement and reduced deaths by 97%. There is no disease I can think of where it's better to contact the disease versus getting the vaccine.
link to original post

Last week I was riding the bus, and a pretty girl walked onto the bus, and she was wearing a skirt. And as she walked by, I put my monkey paw up under her skirt!

And she said "How dare you touch me like that! That's assault!"

And I told her "Don't worry, it was all for the sake of science. I thought I saw a squirrel run up under your skirt and I was trying to remove it. I could be wrong, but there was a chance I really did see a squirrel. And there is also a chance that squirrel could be rabid, and bite you and cause you to die. But there is no chance my touching you under your skirt could cause your death. Therefore, I performed an act with zero chance of causing your death to correct a condition with a nonzero chance of causing your death. Trust me, I'm a scientist."

And she said "Oh. Well then, thank you for.." wait- that's crazy, she didn't say anything like that and I've never done anything like that!!

It's all about consent. Keeping everything consensual, with no compulsion of any kind, will keep us all getting along and will actually increase support for these public health measures.
link to original post

Clearly, you have dizzying intellect.

Quote: AutomaticMonkey

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AutomaticMonkey

Last week I was riding the bus, and a pretty girl walked onto the bus, and she was wearing a skirt. And as she walked by, I put my monkey paw up under her skirt!

And she said "How dare you touch me like that! That's assault!"

And I told her "Don't worry, it was all for the sake of science. I thought I saw a squirrel run up under your skirt and I was trying to remove it. I could be wrong, but there was a chance I really did see a squirrel. And there is also a chance that squirrel could be rabid, and bite you and cause you to die. But there is no chance my touching you under your skirt could cause your death. Therefore, I performed an act with zero chance of causing your death to correct a condition with a nonzero chance of causing your death. Trust me, I'm a scientist."

And she said "Oh. Well then, thank you for.." wait- that's crazy, she didn't say anything like that and I've never done anything like that!!

It's all about consent. Keeping everything consensual, with no compulsion of any kind, will keep us all getting along and will actually increase support for these public health measures.
link to original post

Clearly, you have dizzying intellect.
link to original post

Aw thanks, I get that a lot. I'll try not to make anyone's head spin too fast.

People get very upset about being forced or compelled. If you look up the terms "nonconsensual" and "forcible compulsion" in a law encyclopedia they're usually used in reference to a certain crime that disgusts and angers people to the extreme, and it is a crime against the body. We can generalize that and say that any nonconsensual or forcible thing done to the body of another is going to inspire the same feelings and cause that person to hate you, and being hated has consequences.

With the events we all saw a few years ago, it seemed like the more the one side disliked and distrusted some measure, the more the other side insisted it must be applied to them. Can't fool me, they were getting their jollies doing that! People like power, and as a very smart man once said "The only way to know and prove that you have power, is to make someone else's life hell." You can brighten up someone's day without any power at all, so doing that doesn't satisfy someone who craves power, and there are many such people, and you are as likely to find them already in a position of power as you are to find a drunk already in a bar. And from the opposite side, the more the one were forced and put upon, the more extreme they were willing to be and the more they rejected everything about the other, even when it was counterproductive to do those things.

Forgive me if I do not think . And the individual is always in charge; they're the captain of their own ship, and we respect that they are the only one who is going to have to go down with it. I'm not sure if this is stressed enough in the education of medical professionals- if you screw up, you won't feel a thing, but it is someone else who might be dying horribly as a result, or have lifelong consequences that they will be the only one suffering. That's what makes the principle of consent in medicine such a sacred thing.
link to original post

It's a good thing, then, that nonconsensuality, anger, hatred, and vituperation are not elements of public health policy! Information is delivered gently, with alternative *scientifically valid and reliable* viewpoints sought after and valued.

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AutomaticMonkey

Quote: AZDuffman

Haven't seen anything on it. "Multiple vaccines" could mean anything. My thought is this happens regular but this is the time you choose to notice and think the world is ending because of it? When you see news like this one should ask themselves, "compared to what?" How many vaccines are being removed vs. how many are there in total? Are they for things we do not need to vax for, like old flu strains or smallpox?

Sounds like business as usual to me.
link to original post

I guess that could be another possibility for societal collapse or extinction- an unintentional iatrogenic genocide.

I'm not looking for any trouble so I'm not going to express it in terms of any current real-world concerns, but suppose there was some universally applied medical intervention, that was believed to be harmless, but there is no substitute for time and in time it proved to be deadly and sterilizing to all those who took it.

This thought came to me when I read that there was a negative correlation between having had chickenpox and developing brain cancer. Given a choice between those two things, I think I'll take my chances with chickenpox! But now they vaccinate for chickenpox. Given that correlation, are you sure you want to do that?

The microbes that are endemic to a species evolved with that species, and there's generally some kind of symbiotic relationship. Like our gut bacteria. We can't live without those for very long. And who knows what those little bugs in our eyelashes do, maybe they keep us from going blind or something? Trying to hack nature (especially evolution) is risky business. We should do this slowly and thoughtfully.
link to original post

If such a medical intervention had the sort of adverse effect you mentioned, medical scientists and public health experts would be all over it.

As for chickenpox versus vaccination, what is the comparison of the incidence of brain cancer in the vaccinated versus unvaccinated compared the risk of death in the vaccinated versus the unvaccinated?
link to original post

Chickenpox was always just a thing you got. Discomfort for about a week then over it. In my day parents had "chickenpox parties" if a kid was known to have it so the others would get it. Because it was better to get it young than as an adult where there could be complications. Risk of death? Pretty close to zero.
link to original post

We had chicken pox parties way back in the day because we didn't have a vaccine, and chicken pox was a disease of the youth. Those youths suffered greatly, often at risk of permanent disfigurement due to the pox and at risk of death. The vaccine changed all that. The vaccine reduced the suffering of today's youths, drastically reduced the risk of permanent disfigurement and reduced deaths by 97%. There is no disease I can think of where it's better to contact the disease versus getting the vaccine.
link to original post

Disfigurement? Maybe you had a few scars, not a big deal. As to death, I cannot recall ever hearing of anyone who got it in childhood dying. You itched like crazy, in a week it was over.
link to original post

In all seriousness, can you tell us your expert credentials on this topic? Are you a physician, nurse practitioner or physician's assistant? Do you have a degree in pharmacy, nursing or biology? Do you have formal and credentialed education in medical epidemiology or bio-statistics? Are you a virologist or microbiologist? What expertise do you have that make your comments credible?
link to original post

You do not need a degree to remember having chickenpox as a kid and you do not need a degree to remember what you saw in life. You just need to think for yourself.

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AutomaticMonkey

Quote: AZDuffman

Haven't seen anything on it. "Multiple vaccines" could mean anything. My thought is this happens regular but this is the time you choose to notice and think the world is ending because of it? When you see news like this one should ask themselves, "compared to what?" How many vaccines are being removed vs. how many are there in total? Are they for things we do not need to vax for, like old flu strains or smallpox?

Sounds like business as usual to me.
link to original post

I guess that could be another possibility for societal collapse or extinction- an unintentional iatrogenic genocide.

I'm not looking for any trouble so I'm not going to express it in terms of any current real-world concerns, but suppose there was some universally applied medical intervention, that was believed to be harmless, but there is no substitute for time and in time it proved to be deadly and sterilizing to all those who took it.

This thought came to me when I read that there was a negative correlation between having had chickenpox and developing brain cancer. Given a choice between those two things, I think I'll take my chances with chickenpox! But now they vaccinate for chickenpox. Given that correlation, are you sure you want to do that?

The microbes that are endemic to a species evolved with that species, and there's generally some kind of symbiotic relationship. Like our gut bacteria. We can't live without those for very long. And who knows what those little bugs in our eyelashes do, maybe they keep us from going blind or something? Trying to hack nature (especially evolution) is risky business. We should do this slowly and thoughtfully.
link to original post

If such a medical intervention had the sort of adverse effect you mentioned, medical scientists and public health experts would be all over it.

As for chickenpox versus vaccination, what is the comparison of the incidence of brain cancer in the vaccinated versus unvaccinated compared the risk of death in the vaccinated versus the unvaccinated?
link to original post

Chickenpox was always just a thing you got. Discomfort for about a week then over it. In my day parents had "chickenpox parties" if a kid was known to have it so the others would get it. Because it was better to get it young than as an adult where there could be complications. Risk of death? Pretty close to zero.
link to original post

We had chicken pox parties way back in the day because we didn't have a vaccine, and chicken pox was a disease of the youth. Those youths suffered greatly, often at risk of permanent disfigurement due to the pox and at risk of death. The vaccine changed all that. The vaccine reduced the suffering of today's youths, drastically reduced the risk of permanent disfigurement and reduced deaths by 97%. There is no disease I can think of where it's better to contact the disease versus getting the vaccine.
link to original post

Disfigurement? Maybe you had a few scars, not a big deal. As to death, I cannot recall ever hearing of anyone who got it in childhood dying. You itched like crazy, in a week it was over.
link to original post

In all seriousness, can you tell us your expert credentials on this topic? Are you a physician, nurse practitioner or physician's assistant? Do you have a degree in pharmacy, nursing or biology? Do you have formal and credentialed education in medical epidemiology or bio-statistics? Are you a virologist or microbiologist? What expertise do you have that make your comments credible?
link to original post

You do not need a degree to remember having chickenpox as a kid and you do not need a degree to remember what you saw in life. You just need to think for yourself.
link to original post

So does that mean you have absolutely no scientific or medical credentials to speak intelligently on the subject?

Quote: GenoDRPh

It's a good thing, then, that nonconsensuality, anger, hatred, and vituperation are not elements of public health policy! Information is delivered gently, with alternative *scientifically valid and reliable* viewpoints sought after and valued.
link to original post

Who decides what is scientifically valid and reliable, and why is that important in the non-scientific areas of medicine, ethics, and government? Science can tell you how to do something but not what you should do. Science in its pure form is also remarkably amoral.

Come to think of it, how does medical training make one ethical, or reliable, or scientific, or anything really? Josef Mengele had a perfectly legitimate medical education. So does Earl Bradley. Fat lot of good it did them, or the people they victimized. It demonstrates credentials alone can't be trusted. Doctors get caught in billing fraud, narcotics violations and abuse of patients all the time, every modern judge who has taken bribes has a law degree, cops falsify evidence and violate people's rights, nurses murder their patients for the feeling of power it gives them, scientists engage in academic and research fraud regularly for the purpose of securing grants and prestige. I have my own credentials and I believe credentials have a place, but I also know a person with professional credentials has the same desires, emotions, vices, and character flaws as anyone else.

Quote: GenoDRPh

[snip]

So does that mean you have absolutely no scientific or medical credentials to speak intelligently on the subject?
link to original post

In my opinion, most of our regular WOV forum members are highly intelligent, even though we all may disagree because we have had different life experiences. I have degrees in physics and nuclear engineering and was a well-known research scientist in my fields but I'm also smart enough to understand that wisdom and insight are not highly correlated with particular college degrees or credentials. I've known some terribly unimpressive PhDs, lawyers and doctors. On the other hand, no US president has ever had "scientific or medical credentials" but many were able to "speak intelligently" about many subjects.

You may certainly disagree with other forum members but when you imply that they lack "credentials to speak intelligently" you are inching up to the point of insulting a person. Please be aware that you should refrain from doing that.

Quote: gordonm888

Quote: GenoDRPh

[snip]

So does that mean you have absolutely no scientific or medical credentials to speak intelligently on the subject?
link to original post

In my opinion, most of our regular WOV forum members are highly intelligent, even though we all may disagree because we have had different life experiences. I have degrees in physics and nuclear engineering and was a well-known research scientist in my fields but I'm also smart enough to understand that wisdom and insight are not highly correlated with particular college degrees or credentials. I've known some terribly unimpressive PhDs, lawyers and doctors. On the other hand, no US president has ever had "scientific or medical credentials" but many were able to "speak intelligently" about many subjects.

You may certainly disagree with other forum members but when you imply that they lack "credentials to speak intelligently" you are inching up to the point of insulting a person. Please be aware that you should refrain from doing that.
link to original post

That is your opinion.

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AutomaticMonkey

Quote: AZDuffman

Haven't seen anything on it. "Multiple vaccines" could mean anything. My thought is this happens regular but this is the time you choose to notice and think the world is ending because of it? When you see news like this one should ask themselves, "compared to what?" How many vaccines are being removed vs. how many are there in total? Are they for things we do not need to vax for, like old flu strains or smallpox?

Sounds like business as usual to me.
link to original post

I guess that could be another possibility for societal collapse or extinction- an unintentional iatrogenic genocide.

I'm not looking for any trouble so I'm not going to express it in terms of any current real-world concerns, but suppose there was some universally applied medical intervention, that was believed to be harmless, but there is no substitute for time and in time it proved to be deadly and sterilizing to all those who took it.

This thought came to me when I read that there was a negative correlation between having had chickenpox and developing brain cancer. Given a choice between those two things, I think I'll take my chances with chickenpox! But now they vaccinate for chickenpox. Given that correlation, are you sure you want to do that?

The microbes that are endemic to a species evolved with that species, and there's generally some kind of symbiotic relationship. Like our gut bacteria. We can't live without those for very long. And who knows what those little bugs in our eyelashes do, maybe they keep us from going blind or something? Trying to hack nature (especially evolution) is risky business. We should do this slowly and thoughtfully.
link to original post

If such a medical intervention had the sort of adverse effect you mentioned, medical scientists and public health experts would be all over it.

As for chickenpox versus vaccination, what is the comparison of the incidence of brain cancer in the vaccinated versus unvaccinated compared the risk of death in the vaccinated versus the unvaccinated?
link to original post

Chickenpox was always just a thing you got. Discomfort for about a week then over it. In my day parents had "chickenpox parties" if a kid was known to have it so the others would get it. Because it was better to get it young than as an adult where there could be complications. Risk of death? Pretty close to zero.
link to original post

We had chicken pox parties way back in the day because we didn't have a vaccine, and chicken pox was a disease of the youth. Those youths suffered greatly, often at risk of permanent disfigurement due to the pox and at risk of death. The vaccine changed all that. The vaccine reduced the suffering of today's youths, drastically reduced the risk of permanent disfigurement and reduced deaths by 97%. There is no disease I can think of where it's better to contact the disease versus getting the vaccine.
link to original post

Disfigurement? Maybe you had a few scars, not a big deal. As to death, I cannot recall ever hearing of anyone who got it in childhood dying. You itched like crazy, in a week it was over.
link to original post

In all seriousness, can you tell us your expert credentials on this topic? Are you a physician, nurse practitioner or physician's assistant? Do you have a degree in pharmacy, nursing or biology? Do you have formal and credentialed education in medical epidemiology or bio-statistics? Are you a virologist or microbiologist? What expertise do you have that make your comments credible?
link to original post

You do not need a degree to remember having chickenpox as a kid and you do not need a degree to remember what you saw in life. You just need to think for yourself.
link to original post

So does that mean you have absolutely no scientific or medical credentials to speak intelligently on the subject?
link to original post

This is an Internet forum not a board examination. I notice you do not try to refute my statements instead you throw out a red herring implying if a person does not have a degree they cannot speak on a subject.

You cannot refute that parents used to have chickenpox parties to make sure their kids caught it young. Every boomer and Xer on here will agree they remember it at least heard of the practice. Why would a person need a degree to be cola in that?

Ditto on long term effects. Ask people who had chickenpox as a kid if they have any scars or such. They probably don’t. I had some for like maybe a year but they were minor and healed. Most people who had it will likely say the same. Why would anybody need a degree to explain that.

A post said 150 kids per year used to sue from it. You do not need a math degree to know that is three per state per year on average. Or just three per week. Both low numbers.

The problem you seem to have here is with people who do not just believe what they are told and question things. We had the same issue here with masks during the virus scare. Guess what? Those who questioned the masks have been proven right. Proving thinking for yourself is better than blindly following.

So if you want to refute a statement by making a case against it feel free. That is what forums like this are for. But saying a statement cannot be right because someone has no degree or certification? If that is your standard then this kind of discussion might not be for you.

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AutomaticMonkey

Quote: AZDuffman

Haven't seen anything on it. "Multiple vaccines" could mean anything. My thought is this happens regular but this is the time you choose to notice and think the world is ending because of it? When you see news like this one should ask themselves, "compared to what?" How many vaccines are being removed vs. how many are there in total? Are they for things we do not need to vax for, like old flu strains or smallpox?

Sounds like business as usual to me.
link to original post

I guess that could be another possibility for societal collapse or extinction- an unintentional iatrogenic genocide.

I'm not looking for any trouble so I'm not going to express it in terms of any current real-world concerns, but suppose there was some universally applied medical intervention, that was believed to be harmless, but there is no substitute for time and in time it proved to be deadly and sterilizing to all those who took it.

This thought came to me when I read that there was a negative correlation between having had chickenpox and developing brain cancer. Given a choice between those two things, I think I'll take my chances with chickenpox! But now they vaccinate for chickenpox. Given that correlation, are you sure you want to do that?

The microbes that are endemic to a species evolved with that species, and there's generally some kind of symbiotic relationship. Like our gut bacteria. We can't live without those for very long. And who knows what those little bugs in our eyelashes do, maybe they keep us from going blind or something? Trying to hack nature (especially evolution) is risky business. We should do this slowly and thoughtfully.
link to original post

If such a medical intervention had the sort of adverse effect you mentioned, medical scientists and public health experts would be all over it.

As for chickenpox versus vaccination, what is the comparison of the incidence of brain cancer in the vaccinated versus unvaccinated compared the risk of death in the vaccinated versus the unvaccinated?
link to original post

Chickenpox was always just a thing you got. Discomfort for about a week then over it. In my day parents had "chickenpox parties" if a kid was known to have it so the others would get it. Because it was better to get it young than as an adult where there could be complications. Risk of death? Pretty close to zero.
link to original post

We had chicken pox parties way back in the day because we didn't have a vaccine, and chicken pox was a disease of the youth. Those youths suffered greatly, often at risk of permanent disfigurement due to the pox and at risk of death. The vaccine changed all that. The vaccine reduced the suffering of today's youths, drastically reduced the risk of permanent disfigurement and reduced deaths by 97%. There is no disease I can think of where it's better to contact the disease versus getting the vaccine.
link to original post

Disfigurement? Maybe you had a few scars, not a big deal. As to death, I cannot recall ever hearing of anyone who got it in childhood dying. You itched like crazy, in a week it was over.
link to original post

In all seriousness, can you tell us your expert credentials on this topic? Are you a physician, nurse practitioner or physician's assistant? Do you have a degree in pharmacy, nursing or biology? Do you have formal and credentialed education in medical epidemiology or bio-statistics? Are you a virologist or microbiologist? What expertise do you have that make your comments credible?
link to original post

You do not need a degree to remember having chickenpox as a kid and you do not need a degree to remember what you saw in life. You just need to think for yourself.
link to original post

So does that mean you have absolutely no scientific or medical credentials to speak intelligently on the subject?
link to original post

This is an Internet forum not a board examination. I notice you do not try to refute my statements instead you throw out a red herring implying if a person does not have a degree they cannot speak on a subject.

You cannot refute that parents used to have chickenpox parties to make sure their kids caught it young. Every boomer and Xer on here will agree they remember it at least heard of the practice. Why would a person need a degree to be cola in that?

Ditto on long term effects. Ask people who had chickenpox as a kid if they have any scars or such. They probably don’t. I had some for like maybe a year but they were minor and healed. Most people who had it will likely say the same. Why would anybody need a degree to explain that.

A post said 150 kids per year used to sue from it. You do not need a math degree to know that is three per state per year on average. Or just three per week. Both low numbers.

The problem you seem to have here is with people who do not just believe what they are told and question things. We had the same issue here with masks during the virus scare. Guess what? Those who questioned the masks have been proven right. Proving thinking for yourself is better than blindly following.

So if you want to refute a statement by making a case against it feel free. That is what forums like this are for. But saying a statement cannot be right because someone has no degree or certification? If that is your standard then this kind of discussion might not be for you.
link to original post

Yes, if you have no credentials, your statements must be subject to great scrutiny.

You are not a doctor. You are not a medical practitioner. You are not a scientist. You are not a pharmacist or nurse or epidemiologist. Your statements about chicken pox are about as valid and reliable as if you said the Big Six is the best bet on the craps table, or Keno is the best bet in the entire casino. Your ignorance is not equal to actual facts. And if that earns me a suspension, bring it on.

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AutomaticMonkey

Quote: AZDuffman

Haven't seen anything on it. "Multiple vaccines" could mean anything. My thought is this happens regular but this is the time you choose to notice and think the world is ending because of it? When you see news like this one should ask themselves, "compared to what?" How many vaccines are being removed vs. how many are there in total? Are they for things we do not need to vax for, like old flu strains or smallpox?

Sounds like business as usual to me.
link to original post

I guess that could be another possibility for societal collapse or extinction- an unintentional iatrogenic genocide.

I'm not looking for any trouble so I'm not going to express it in terms of any current real-world concerns, but suppose there was some universally applied medical intervention, that was believed to be harmless, but there is no substitute for time and in time it proved to be deadly and sterilizing to all those who took it.

This thought came to me when I read that there was a negative correlation between having had chickenpox and developing brain cancer. Given a choice between those two things, I think I'll take my chances with chickenpox! But now they vaccinate for chickenpox. Given that correlation, are you sure you want to do that?

The microbes that are endemic to a species evolved with that species, and there's generally some kind of symbiotic relationship. Like our gut bacteria. We can't live without those for very long. And who knows what those little bugs in our eyelashes do, maybe they keep us from going blind or something? Trying to hack nature (especially evolution) is risky business. We should do this slowly and thoughtfully.
link to original post

If such a medical intervention had the sort of adverse effect you mentioned, medical scientists and public health experts would be all over it.

As for chickenpox versus vaccination, what is the comparison of the incidence of brain cancer in the vaccinated versus unvaccinated compared the risk of death in the vaccinated versus the unvaccinated?
link to original post

Chickenpox was always just a thing you got. Discomfort for about a week then over it. In my day parents had "chickenpox parties" if a kid was known to have it so the others would get it. Because it was better to get it young than as an adult where there could be complications. Risk of death? Pretty close to zero.
link to original post

We had chicken pox parties way back in the day because we didn't have a vaccine, and chicken pox was a disease of the youth. Those youths suffered greatly, often at risk of permanent disfigurement due to the pox and at risk of death. The vaccine changed all that. The vaccine reduced the suffering of today's youths, drastically reduced the risk of permanent disfigurement and reduced deaths by 97%. There is no disease I can think of where it's better to contact the disease versus getting the vaccine.
link to original post

Disfigurement? Maybe you had a few scars, not a big deal. As to death, I cannot recall ever hearing of anyone who got it in childhood dying. You itched like crazy, in a week it was over.
link to original post

In all seriousness, can you tell us your expert credentials on this topic? Are you a physician, nurse practitioner or physician's assistant? Do you have a degree in pharmacy, nursing or biology? Do you have formal and credentialed education in medical epidemiology or bio-statistics? Are you a virologist or microbiologist? What expertise do you have that make your comments credible?
link to original post

You do not need a degree to remember having chickenpox as a kid and you do not need a degree to remember what you saw in life. You just need to think for yourself.
link to original post

So does that mean you have absolutely no scientific or medical credentials to speak intelligently on the subject?
link to original post

This is an Internet forum not a board examination. I notice you do not try to refute my statements instead you throw out a red herring implying if a person does not have a degree they cannot speak on a subject.

You cannot refute that parents used to have chickenpox parties to make sure their kids caught it young. Every boomer and Xer on here will agree they remember it at least heard of the practice. Why would a person need a degree to be cola in that?

Ditto on long term effects. Ask people who had chickenpox as a kid if they have any scars or such. They probably don’t. I had some for like maybe a year but they were minor and healed. Most people who had it will likely say the same. Why would anybody need a degree to explain that.

A post said 150 kids per year used to sue from it. You do not need a math degree to know that is three per state per year on average. Or just three per week. Both low numbers.

The problem you seem to have here is with people who do not just believe what they are told and question things. We had the same issue here with masks during the virus scare. Guess what? Those who questioned the masks have been proven right. Proving thinking for yourself is better than blindly following.

So if you want to refute a statement by making a case against it feel free. That is what forums like this are for. But saying a statement cannot be right because someone has no degree or certification? If that is your standard then this kind of discussion might not be for you.
link to original post

Yes, if you have no credentials, your statements must be subject to great scrutiny.

You are not a doctor. You are not a medical practitioner. You are not a scientist. You are not a pharmacist or nurse or epidemiologist. Your statements about chicken pox are about as valid and reliable as if you said the Big Six is the best bet on the craps table, or Keno is the best bet in the entire casino. Your ignorance is not equal to actual facts. And if that earns me a suspension, bring it on.
link to original post

Then scrutinize on the statements as they are. Not on if the person posting them has a medical degree. As to an actual facts you have not challenged the facts. You are saying that someone without a degree must not know about them.

Quote: gordonm888

In my opinion, most of our regular WOV forum members are highly intelligent, even though we all may disagree because we have had different life experiences. I have degrees in physics and nuclear engineering and was a well-known research scientist in my fields
link to original post

So that's why you're in favor of the simulation theory. I would say God bless you, if I believed in God.

Quote: GenoDRPh

Yes, if you have no credentials, your statements must be subject to great scrutiny.

You are not a doctor. You are not a medical practitioner. You are not a scientist. You are not a pharmacist or nurse or epidemiologist. Your statements about chicken pox are about as valid and reliable as if you said the Big Six is the best bet on the craps table, or Keno is the best bet in the entire casino. Your ignorance is not equal to actual facts. And if that earns me a suspension, bring it on.
link to original post

Have you forgotten where you are? Let me help...

You are on an internet forum, where, for reasons you fully understand, most of us keep our online identities separate from our real-world identities and activities.

Therefore, you might be a credentialed medical professional. You might be a Nobel laureate in medicine! Or you might be a troll pretending, for craic and satisfaction. And that's all fine, nobody's going to investigate or hold any of that against you. But the fact that you will never be asked to prove your credentials also means that you cannot use your credentials to make a point.

And also, some of the people you are speaking to along the lines of "You are not a doctor!" may actually be, and are sandbagging and giggling for their own entertainment.

On fora like these, people are judged by what they present on the forum. Yeah, in real life I have a bunch of stuff too, patents, professional awards, a very weird CV. But I can't use any of that here. All I have to present and be judged by are good ideas and good words. Now we have some guys like the Wizard and like the game designers who choose to be public and we can go to their websites and blogs and see their real-world work product and know they are to be taken seriously by that. But the rest of us, we just have rhetoric, our words have to defend themselves and make sense to people just as they appear on the screen, with nothing else about us backing them up.

Quote: AutomaticMonkey

Quote: GenoDRPh

Yes, if you have no credentials, your statements must be subject to great scrutiny.

You are not a doctor. You are not a medical practitioner. You are not a scientist. You are not a pharmacist or nurse or epidemiologist. Your statements about chicken pox are about as valid and reliable as if you said the Big Six is the best bet on the craps table, or Keno is the best bet in the entire casino. Your ignorance is not equal to actual facts. And if that earns me a suspension, bring it on.
link to original post

Have you forgotten where you are? Let me help...

You are on an internet forum, where, for reasons you fully understand, most of us keep our online identities separate from our real-world identities and activities.

Therefore, you might be a credentialed medical professional. You might be a Nobel laureate in medicine! Or you might be a troll pretending, for craic and satisfaction. And that's all fine, nobody's going to investigate or hold any of that against you. But the fact that you will never be asked to prove your credentials also means that you cannot use your credentials to make a point.

And also, some of the people you are speaking to along the lines of "You are not a doctor!" may actually be, and are sandbagging and giggling for their own entertainment.

On fora like these, people are judged by what they present on the forum. Yeah, in real life I have a bunch of stuff too, patents, professional awards, a very weird CV. But I can't use any of that here. All I have to present and be judged by are good ideas and good words. Now we have some guys like the Wizard and like the game designers who choose to be public and we can go to their websites and blogs and see their real-world work product and know they are to be taken seriously by that. But the rest of us, we just have rhetoric, our words have to defend themselves and make sense to people just as they appear on the screen, with nothing else about us backing them up.
link to original post

I disagree. If someone makes a claim, I like to see evidence that backs them up, as well as their credibility in making that claim. If they wish to hid behind anonymity, that is their choice. That means that we will judge them based on their public facing statements. And if they wish to hid their credentials, education and expertise, then it is reasonable to assume they have none. And is someone wishes to sandbag, that's their problem.

Quote: AutomaticMonkey

Quote: GenoDRPh

Yes, if you have no credentials, your statements must be subject to great scrutiny.

You are not a doctor. You are not a medical practitioner. You are not a scientist. You are not a pharmacist or nurse or epidemiologist. Your statements about chicken pox are about as valid and reliable as if you said the Big Six is the best bet on the craps table, or Keno is the best bet in the entire casino. Your ignorance is not equal to actual facts. And if that earns me a suspension, bring it on.
link to original post

Have you forgotten where you are? Let me help...

You are on an internet forum, where, for reasons you fully understand, most of us keep our online identities separate from our real-world identities and activities.

Therefore, you might be a credentialed medical professional. You might be a Nobel laureate in medicine! Or you might be a troll pretending, for craic and satisfaction. And that's all fine, nobody's going to investigate or hold any of that against you. But the fact that you will never be asked to prove your credentials also means that you cannot use your credentials to make a point.

And also, some of the people you are speaking to along the lines of "You are not a doctor!" may actually be, and are sandbagging and giggling for their own entertainment.

On fora like these, people are judged by what they present on the forum. Yeah, in real life I have a bunch of stuff too, patents, professional awards, a very weird CV. But I can't use any of that here. All I have to present and be judged by are good ideas and good words. Now we have some guys like the Wizard and like the game designers who choose to be public and we can go to their websites and blogs and see their real-world work product and know they are to be taken seriously by that. But the rest of us, we just have rhetoric, our words have to defend themselves and make sense to people just as they appear on the screen, with nothing else about us backing them up.
link to original post

I disagree. If someone makes a claim, I like to see evidence that backs them up, as well as their credibility in making that claim. If they wish to hid behind anonymity, that is their choice. That means that we will judge them based on their public facing statements. And if they wish to hid their credentials, education and expertise, then it is reasonable to assume they have none. And is someone wishes to sandbag, that's their problem.

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AutomaticMonkey

Quote: GenoDRPh

Yes, if you have no credentials, your statements must be subject to great scrutiny.

You are not a doctor. You are not a medical practitioner. You are not a scientist. You are not a pharmacist or nurse or epidemiologist. Your statements about chicken pox are about as valid and reliable as if you said the Big Six is the best bet on the craps table, or Keno is the best bet in the entire casino. Your ignorance is not equal to actual facts. And if that earns me a suspension, bring it on.
link to original post

Have you forgotten where you are? Let me help...

You are on an internet forum, where, for reasons you fully understand, most of us keep our online identities separate from our real-world identities and activities.

Therefore, you might be a credentialed medical professional. You might be a Nobel laureate in medicine! Or you might be a troll pretending, for craic and satisfaction. And that's all fine, nobody's going to investigate or hold any of that against you. But the fact that you will never be asked to prove your credentials also means that you cannot use your credentials to make a point.

And also, some of the people you are speaking to along the lines of "You are not a doctor!" may actually be, and are sandbagging and giggling for their own entertainment.

On fora like these, people are judged by what they present on the forum. Yeah, in real life I have a bunch of stuff too, patents, professional awards, a very weird CV. But I can't use any of that here. All I have to present and be judged by are good ideas and good words. Now we have some guys like the Wizard and like the game designers who choose to be public and we can go to their websites and blogs and see their real-world work product and know they are to be taken seriously by that. But the rest of us, we just have rhetoric, our words have to defend themselves and make sense to people just as they appear on the screen, with nothing else about us backing them up.
link to original post

I disagree. If someone makes a claim, I like to see evidence that backs them up, as well as their credibility in making that claim.

Then you should probably quit forums and take a college class or something.

This thread has been created from posts split off from the Societal Collapse/Extinction Events thread because this discussion, while interesting, was off-topic to that thread.

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AutomaticMonkey

Quote: GenoDRPh

Yes, if you have no credentials, your statements must be subject to great scrutiny.

You are not a doctor. You are not a medical practitioner. You are not a scientist. You are not a pharmacist or nurse or epidemiologist. Your statements about chicken pox are about as valid and reliable as if you said the Big Six is the best bet on the craps table, or Keno is the best bet in the entire casino. Your ignorance is not equal to actual facts. And if that earns me a suspension, bring it on.
link to original post

Have you forgotten where you are? Let me help...

You are on an internet forum, where, for reasons you fully understand, most of us keep our online identities separate from our real-world identities and activities.

Therefore, you might be a credentialed medical professional. You might be a Nobel laureate in medicine! Or you might be a troll pretending, for craic and satisfaction. And that's all fine, nobody's going to investigate or hold any of that against you. But the fact that you will never be asked to prove your credentials also means that you cannot use your credentials to make a point.

And also, some of the people you are speaking to along the lines of "You are not a doctor!" may actually be, and are sandbagging and giggling for their own entertainment.

On fora like these, people are judged by what they present on the forum. Yeah, in real life I have a bunch of stuff too, patents, professional awards, a very weird CV. But I can't use any of that here. All I have to present and be judged by are good ideas and good words. Now we have some guys like the Wizard and like the game designers who choose to be public and we can go to their websites and blogs and see their real-world work product and know they are to be taken seriously by that. But the rest of us, we just have rhetoric, our words have to defend themselves and make sense to people just as they appear on the screen, with nothing else about us backing them up.
link to original post

I disagree. If someone makes a claim, I like to see evidence that backs them up, as well as their credibility in making that claim. If they wish to hid behind anonymity, that is their choice. That means that we will judge them based on their public facing statements. And if they wish to hid their credentials, education and expertise, then it is reasonable to assume they have none. And is someone wishes to sandbag, that's their problem.
link to original post

This isn't a courtroom. Prepare to be disappointed that your unreasonable standards will not be met.

Quote: KevinAA

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AutomaticMonkey

Quote: GenoDRPh

Yes, if you have no credentials, your statements must be subject to great scrutiny.

You are not a doctor. You are not a medical practitioner. You are not a scientist. You are not a pharmacist or nurse or epidemiologist. Your statements about chicken pox are about as valid and reliable as if you said the Big Six is the best bet on the craps table, or Keno is the best bet in the entire casino. Your ignorance is not equal to actual facts. And if that earns me a suspension, bring it on.
link to original post

Have you forgotten where you are? Let me help...

You are on an internet forum, where, for reasons you fully understand, most of us keep our online identities separate from our real-world identities and activities.

Therefore, you might be a credentialed medical professional. You might be a Nobel laureate in medicine! Or you might be a troll pretending, for craic and satisfaction. And that's all fine, nobody's going to investigate or hold any of that against you. But the fact that you will never be asked to prove your credentials also means that you cannot use your credentials to make a point.

And also, some of the people you are speaking to along the lines of "You are not a doctor!" may actually be, and are sandbagging and giggling for their own entertainment.

On fora like these, people are judged by what they present on the forum. Yeah, in real life I have a bunch of stuff too, patents, professional awards, a very weird CV. But I can't use any of that here. All I have to present and be judged by are good ideas and good words. Now we have some guys like the Wizard and like the game designers who choose to be public and we can go to their websites and blogs and see their real-world work product and know they are to be taken seriously by that. But the rest of us, we just have rhetoric, our words have to defend themselves and make sense to people just as they appear on the screen, with nothing else about us backing them up.
link to original post

I disagree. If someone makes a claim, I like to see evidence that backs them up, as well as their credibility in making that claim. If they wish to hid behind anonymity, that is their choice. That means that we will judge them based on their public facing statements. And if they wish to hid their credentials, education and expertise, then it is reasonable to assume they have none. And is someone wishes to sandbag, that's their problem.
link to original post

This isn't a courtroom. Prepare to be disappointed that your unreasonable standards will not be met.
link to original post

It isn't unreasonable to expect someone, who makes a statement of fact, to be able to back it up with evidence.

Just because someone doesn't have a fancy degree or bother studying a subject, why would their opinions be any less valid than the so-called experts?
If a homophobic racist uses ChatGPT to spout utter nonsense, does it matter if they have a degree?