Christie clarifies comments on measles vaccine, calls for ‘balance’

[garbon]

True.  Except that its fun to be a dick about things when people go all faux-wide-eyed about a topic.

There was nothing faux about it. I haven't spent much time looking into and evaluating the potential negative effects of vaccines.

Basically any product put out by pharma/biotech runs the risk of screwing people up.

[grumbler]

If you can train yourself to follow the science instead of the hype, you can find these things out without me having to tell you.

Why would I do that when it is such a pleasure to converse with you?

Because it is more pleasant to converse with you when you are not pretending that you don't know how to Google, and that you have to ask your opponent to provide information that you should have more pride than to pretend ignorance of.

Discussions are pleasant when both sides present actual arguments and evidence, not faux ignorance and obstructive requests for the easily-found.  I know that because I have had plenty of pleasurable discussions with you, and those were the characteristics of those pleasant discussions.

[grumbler]

True.  Except that its fun to be a dick about things when people go all faux-wide-eyed about a topic.

There was nothing faux about it. I haven't spent much time looking into and evaluating the potential negative effects of vaccines.

Really?  You want us to believe that you don't know how to Google, and so had to ask me to do it for you?

Bullshit.

[Razgovory]

You are really in a nasty mood today.

[Jacob]

Really?  You want us to believe that you don't know how to Google, and so had to ask me to do it for you?

Bullshit.

No, I was too lazy to go to google and wade through BS and genuine information and then read and digest the results and reach a conclusion on the subject.

Since you apparently had already spent the time to form a solid opinion based on perusing the relevant facts and reaching a well-reasoned conclusion, I was hoping you would be willing to offer a quick summary.

Alas, my hopes were cruelly dashed

[Zanza]

The argument Seedy made was against the statement that "not every disease type is as great a public health threat as others," claiming that a selected efficacy listing disproved the statement.  I'd say his list proves nothing, and that smallpox is, indeed, "not  as great a public health threat" as, say, influenza.  If you want to dispute my argument, then feel free, but you cannot dispute my argument by stealing it.

Not sure what your argument even is, but then based on your forum history, it's probably some kind of semantics point that I don't care about.

[garbon]

The argument Seedy made was against the statement that "not every disease type is as great a public health threat as others," claiming that a selected efficacy listing disproved the statement.  I'd say his list proves nothing, and that smallpox is, indeed, "not  as great a public health threat" as, say, influenza.  If you want to dispute my argument, then feel free, but you cannot dispute my argument by stealing it.

Not sure what your argument even is, but then based on your forum history, it's probably some kind of semantics point that I don't care about.

I think it is about the fact that the statement is true that "not every disease type is as great a public health threat as others."

[grumbler]

No, I was too lazy to go to google and wade through BS and genuine information and then read and digest the results and reach a conclusion on the subject.

  The CDC site is the first hit on Google.  If you don't believe them, why would you believe me?

[grumbler]

Not sure what your argument even is, but then based on your forum history, it's probably some kind of semantics point that I don't care about.

Based on your forum history, I doubt I have the skill to make it explicable to you.  Go ahead and assume that every argument of mine is "some kind of semantics point" that you don't care about, and ignore it. 

[Zanza]

I think it is about the fact that the statement is true that "not every disease type is as great a public health threat as others."

Maybe. No idea how his answer to my comment would relate to that though as I didn't address that statement at all. 

[grumbler]

I think it is about the fact that the statement is true that "not every disease type is as great a public health threat as others."

correct.  Not every disease is the same, nor is every immunization.  That doesn't mean that societies shouldn't require immunizations, IMO, but we should know what we are doing when we require it (or support requiring it).  The bullshit rhetoric on both sides doesn't contribute to the public health and safety debate.

[Zanza]

Not sure what your argument even is, but then based on your forum history, it's probably some kind of semantics point that I don't care about.

Based on your forum history, I doubt I have the skill to make it explicable to you.  Go ahead and assume that every argument of mine is "some kind of semantics point" that you don't care about, and ignore it. 

No, you are right. Not all your arguments are semantics points, but all your posts are something I don't care about. 

[grumbler]

No, you are right. Not all your arguments are semantics points, but all your posts are something I don't care about. 

Irony isn't just "the opposite of wrinkly." 

[CountDeMoney]

True.  Except that its fun to be a dick about things when people go all faux-wide-eyed about a topic.

There was nothing faux about it. I haven't spent much time looking into and evaluating the potential negative effects of vaccines.

FACT:  Children have been injured in automobile accidents on the way to vaccination appointments.
FACT:  Children have been injured in automobile accidents on the way from vaccination appointments.

The numbers just don't lie, man.

[Grey Fox]

Automobiles causes autism, CDC reports!