February 2016


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Wed, 24 Feb 2016 00:11:02 -0500
Science for the People Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Jim West <[log in to unmask]>
Science for the People Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
To: Ken Hunter <[log in to unmask]>
text/plain (48 lines)
Amazing! No embarrassment.

Chandler, your next.

Jim West

Science is an insufficient reason to avoid vaccinating a child.  No person has the right to endanger many other person's lives thru inaction or fear.  The benefits to the group ar too great to allow personal decision to interfere even if it IS based on good science, it's based on fear and a lack pof human ability to tell a good outcome from a bad one.  as mammals, we are too short sighted.     
The percentage od disastrous damage is actually very low compared to the damage done by a sick child amongst other un-vaccinated children.  That situation MAKES epidemics.   Epidemics kill many.   

Besides, you made that kid.  Just make another.  

 Those who have the privilege to know have the duty to act.  A Einstein
all messages will be archived because the fascists do

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 9:46 PM, Jim West <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

I challenge you to name one vaccine you understand.

People generally take vaccines on faith. I wouldn't favor any vaccine. Are you aware that one cannot obtain an exemption from vaccines for a school child, if one presents science? Science is not allowed, especially in the courtroom. Evidence that one is scientific disallows the religious exemption, the only exemption available. Perhaps one could argue that one's religion is science, but they would think that too tricky.

On 2/3/2016, I posted here strong evidence that Zika virus is not the cause of microcephaly -- only a few percent of cases are positive for Zika virus. CDC/WHO are looking for better evidence to prove causation. That's the challenge to scientists.

Meanwhile CDC/WHO are not stressing a need for environmental or medical toxicology. I wonder why, duh.

A group from Argentina, "Doctors from Crop-Sprayed Towns" wrote that the CDC/WHO "are not trying to solve the problem. They are building a business within the problem."

Jim West

Thanks for the reference, Mitchel.  That 1991 report does show some reason to fear that one vaccine may incur risk of encephalopathy.  It doesn't include any evidence one way or the other on whether the Zika virus can cause birth defects.

Neither does it incline me to avoid all vaccination.  Excuse me for reminding you--- you and Jim West never responded to my challenge on this list to name one vaccine you favored as a public health measure.  Human papillomavirus vaccine, say.

But back to the birth defects reported from Brazil.  You did us a service a couple of moths ago by pointing to controversy among those studying the outbreak.  Not surprising that the evidence was inconclusive early in the game.  Isn't it true that the evidence is still inconclusive?


On 2/22/2016 11:04 AM, Mitchel Cohen wrote:
US National Center for Biotechnology Information published book in 1991, CONFIRMING that TDAP vaccines DO CAUSE microcephaly.