Vaccines vs Bitcoin

[TECSHARE]

Don't get me wrong, as an Anarchist the thought has definitely crossed my mind that the government could be responsible for putting extra hidden things in the vaccinations without our knowledge and we all know how zombie apocolypses usually get started ( The government working on some biological weapon or highly illegal you know the usual stuff ) but I guess it all goes down to how much you trust the doctors you see. Problem is that Doctors are generally pretty nice people that don't necessarily give a shit about working for the government etc. and just want to help people so it could be either put in their without their knowledge and so on, just so many factors.

I'll tell you one thing that definitely fucking concerns me is the mental health industry and their casual use of 'psychiatric' ( I use the term loosely there ) drugs but that's been heavily scrutinised and we just need to take the same approach with vaccinations, no bullshit hysteria, no "zomg dem guvernment spies put weird stuff in arr vaccinations!" just smuggle a fucking syringe full out to an independent clinic and have it properly tested, that's how you do this sort of thing properly.

It reminds me of Niel De'grasse Tyson and what he said about aliens, all this stuff is so easy to fake but if you can get the real physical thing then bring it over to a lab and let them take a look at it, exact same situation here, I'm not saying that it couldn't be, I'm just not convinced, I can tell you however that flu vaccinations for cats seem to be a load of shit, they may not necesarily harm them but they don't seem to do anything either, that's probably why they try to sell them.

Doctors don't have to be evil to be ignorant or indoctrinated. Ask your doctor what the ingredients in your vaccine are. Watch the puzzled looks.

Ask for relevant papers on disease  prevention efficacy and also question security of injection materials en route to the office.  Then offer a generous payoff for the required paperwork up front. 

Better yet ask the doctor to sign paperwork to the effect that they will take personal liability if you or your children are harmed by vaccination. Watch their buttholes pucker. If they are worried about losing their wealth by injuring you with a vaccination, what makes you think it is a chance you want to take with yourself or your children?

[1715111990]

1715111990

[Anon136]

Ok I finished it up today.

Don't get me wrong, as an Anarchist the thought has definitely crossed my mind that the government could be responsible for putting extra hidden things in the vaccinations without our knowledge

Ah ok. So let me be more clear about what i think the concerns are. The risks, to the extent which i suspect they exist, are not the result of conspiracy, but rather incentive incompatibility between the firms producing vaccines and consumers. The federal government insulates vaccine manufacturers from all liability resulting from injury inflicted by vaccines. Quoting uscourts.gov

The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program ("Vaccine Program") comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 ("Vaccine Act"). See Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755 (1986) (codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34). The Vaccine Act became effective October 1, 1988. It establishes the Vaccine Program as a no-fault compensation program whereby petitions for monetary compensation may be brought by or on behalf of persons allegedly suffering injury or death as a result of the administration of certain compulsory childhood vaccines. Congress intended that the Vaccine Program provide individuals a swift, flexible, and less adversarial alternative to the often costly and lengthy civil arena of traditional tort litigation.

So if you are injured from a vaccine than the federal government pays your damages instead of the vaccine manufacturer. Its like a weird twilight zone inversion of how in criminal cases the offender pays the state instead of the victim. Here the state, rather than the offender, pays the victim . Its a bit ironic because supposedly the justification that people make for state is that only a sovereign can solve some pubic goods problems by internalizing external costs. Here we have a situation where the decentralized process of common law has developed a mechanism for internalizing external costs (tort liability) and the federal government has come along via fiat power re externalized the problem. The cost of damaging someone with a vaccine has been entirely externalized by the vaccine manufacturer onto the tax payer.

So this would be a pretty serious incentive incompatibility problem in and of its self but actually it gets worse because you see, in the event that a vaccine happened to cause some sort of damage to a person, and in the event that this required symptom management, than it is reasonable to expect that the same pharmasutical corporation that produced the vaccine would likely supply many of the drugs used to treat those symptoms. Profitable even in small doses, but very profitable in the event of life long chronic symptom management.

Now lets be clear, we aren't talking about mr burns tenting his fingers and cackling menacingly behind a desk in some big pharma company. You dont actually need that sort of conspiracy in an organization when everyone's incentives are naturally alined in such a way. The self interested response of the participants will simply trickle up through the culture of the organization. The sub conscious defense mechanisms of the participants will naturally instil in them the right sorts of biases to allow them to pursue self interest without destroying their ego (their image of themselves). Humans are amazing at this. We can dismiss arguments and ignore facts that would put us in the position of needed to chose between maintaining our standard of living or our belief that we are a "good person".

As for your friendly neighborhood doctor. Imagine what would happen to his career if he were to begin advising his patients to not take vaccines? His carrer would be over so fast it would make his head spin, a career that he spent 8 years of his life and a million dollars on preparing for. Again here its nothing to do with conspiracy. The people who would be doing the firing would be immersed in the culture described in the previous paragraph. And the doctor himself isnt thinking in his head, i wish i could advise them not to take vaccines but i would lose my job, just the existential threat of this outcome makes it so that he doesn't even examine the idea. Supposing the cost of vaccines ought weighed the benefits and he found himself in a position of needed to chose between a million dollar investment and "the right thing". What a terrible position that would be to find ones self in. Our sub conscious protects us from putting ourselves in these sorts of situations, we have evolved that defense for good reasons.

Anyway thoughts from anyone on my writings here are welcome.

[Lethn]

Exactly it's just another classic symptom of corporatism, the people who regulate these industries are from the industries themselves so naturally their interests aren't aligned with the consumer, thing is, while I don't dispute some very obvious conspiracies out there it pisses me off when I see morons trying to equate everything with a conspiracy. They're not thinking clearly and seem to think that governments are this all encompassing and all powerful force out to get them, they're not competent enough for that.

[grendel25]

The choice of money is such because of the value of that currency.  I value whatever has the most utility when it comes to currency.  If I can save money and use bitcoin then I use it.  It's pretty simple.  No one ever has any sort of right to speak negatively of anyone because of what money they choose to use.  Make a currency better then any other and that's the currency that people will end up using.

[TECSHARE]

Exactly it's just another classic symptom of corporatism, the people who regulate these industries are from the industries themselves so naturally their interests aren't aligned with the consumer, thing is, while I don't dispute some very obvious conspiracies out there it pisses me off when I see morons trying to equate everything with a conspiracy. They're not thinking clearly and seem to think that governments are this all encompassing and all powerful force out to get them, they're not competent enough for that.

Government isn't, but corporations ARE competent and certainly well funded enough for this. Government just serves as a tool of the corporations, they don't deserve all the infamy.

[ObscureBean]

Well common knowledge says that you have the right to do anything you please so long as you have a nice shiny set of interdependable reasons to support your actions. Humans' self-proclaimed supremacy on earth is a testament to this. Seriously you have a choice of near infinite reasons for anything you wanna do. And best of all it's all free 

[TECSHARE]

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/02/17/mit-professor-explains-the-vaccine-autism-connection/

[Anon136]

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/02/17/mit-professor-explains-the-vaccine-autism-connection/

Thanks for the link.

[Anon136]

Don't get me wrong, as an Anarchist the thought has definitely crossed my mind that the government could be responsible for putting extra hidden things in the vaccinations without our knowledge and we all know how zombie apocolypses usually get started ( The government working on some biological weapon or highly illegal you know the usual stuff ) but I guess it all goes down to how much you trust the doctors you see. Problem is that Doctors are generally pretty nice people that don't necessarily give a shit about working for the government etc. and just want to help people so it could be either put in their without their knowledge and so on, just so many factors.

I'll tell you one thing that definitely fucking concerns me is the mental health industry and their casual use of 'psychiatric' ( I use the term loosely there ) drugs but that's been heavily scrutinised and we just need to take the same approach with vaccinations, no bullshit hysteria, no "zomg dem guvernment spies put weird stuff in arr vaccinations!" just smuggle a fucking syringe full out to an independent clinic and have it properly tested, that's how you do this sort of thing properly.

It reminds me of Niel De'grasse Tyson and what he said about aliens, all this stuff is so easy to fake but if you can get the real physical thing then bring it over to a lab and let them take a look at it, exact same situation here, I'm not saying that it couldn't be, I'm just not convinced, I can tell you however that flu vaccinations for cats seem to be a load of shit, they may not necesarily harm them but they don't seem to do anything either, that's probably why they try to sell them.

Doctors don't have to be evil to be ignorant or indoctrinated. Ask your doctor what the ingredients in your vaccine are. Watch the puzzled looks.

Ask for relevant papers on disease  prevention efficacy and also question security of injection materials en route to the office.  Then offer a generous payoff for the required paperwork up front. 

Better yet ask the doctor to sign paperwork to the effect that they will take personal liability if you or your children are harmed by vaccination. Watch their buttholes pucker. If they are worried about losing their wealth by injuring you with a vaccination, what makes you think it is a chance you want to take with yourself or your children?

My wife works at a high class private school and she says the only kids who dont have vaccines are some doctors kids . Anecdotal i know but i found it funny.

[nubbins]

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/02/17/mit-professor-explains-the-vaccine-autism-connection/

Anti-vaxxers are fucking morons.

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/12/31/oh-no-gmos-are-going-to-make-everyone-autistic/

Remember Stephanie Seneff? When last Orac discussed her, she had been caught dumpster diving into the VAERS database in order to torture the data to make it confess a “link” between aluminum adjuvants in vaccines and acetaminophen and—you guessed it!—autism. It was a bad paper in a bad journal known as Entropy that I deconstructed in detail around two years ago. As I said at the time, I hadn’t seen a “review” article that long and that badly done since the even more horrible article by Helen Ratajczak entitled Theoretical aspects of autism: Causes–A review (which, not surprisingly, was cited approvingly by Seneff et al). Seneff, it turns out, is an MIT scientist, but she is not a scientist with any expertise in autism, epidemiology, or, for that matter, any relevant scientific discipline that would give her the background knowledge and skill set to take on analyzing the epidemiological literature regarding autism. Indeed, she is in the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory at MIT

[Anon136]

Seneff, it turns out, is an MIT scientist, but she is not a scientist with any expertise in autism, epidemiology, or, for that matter, any relevant scientific discipline that would give her the background knowledge and skill set to take on analyzing the epidemiological literature regarding autism.

Really? So what medical doctor is supposed to be the relevant scientific discipline for performing statistical analysis on a computer database? No. That would be a job for a computer scientist.

[BitMos]

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/02/17/mit-professor-explains-the-vaccine-autism-connection/

Anti-vaxxers are fucking morons.

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/12/31/oh-no-gmos-are-going-to-make-everyone-autistic/

Remember Stephanie Seneff? When last Orac discussed her, she had been caught dumpster diving into the VAERS database in order to torture the data to make it confess a “link” between aluminum adjuvants in vaccines and acetaminophen and—you guessed it!—autism. It was a bad paper in a bad journal known as Entropy that I deconstructed in detail around two years ago. As I said at the time, I hadn’t seen a “review” article that long and that badly done since the even more horrible article by Helen Ratajczak entitled Theoretical aspects of autism: Causes–A review (which, not surprisingly, was cited approvingly by Seneff et al). Seneff, it turns out, is an MIT scientist, but she is not a scientist with any expertise in autism, epidemiology, or, for that matter, any relevant scientific discipline that would give her the background knowledge and skill set to take on analyzing the epidemiological literature regarding autism. Indeed, she is in the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory at MIT

shatz. as long as we have the guns... you call us all the name in the world that comfort your lies, it will not change a fact, that you, your dirty friends, will not cross the Wall of PLAoC... you can try... but you, your dirty friends will pay with everything they have including their lives. sorry it ain't pink/black powa here. It's the real world.

[TECSHARE]

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/02/17/mit-professor-explains-the-vaccine-autism-connection/

Anti-vaxxers are fucking morons.

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/12/31/oh-no-gmos-are-going-to-make-everyone-autistic/

Remember Stephanie Seneff? When last Orac discussed her, she had been caught dumpster diving into the VAERS database in order to torture the data to make it confess a “link” between aluminum adjuvants in vaccines and acetaminophen and—you guessed it!—autism. It was a bad paper in a bad journal known as Entropy that I deconstructed in detail around two years ago. As I said at the time, I hadn’t seen a “review” article that long and that badly done since the even more horrible article by Helen Ratajczak entitled Theoretical aspects of autism: Causes–A review (which, not surprisingly, was cited approvingly by Seneff et al). Seneff, it turns out, is an MIT scientist, but she is not a scientist with any expertise in autism, epidemiology, or, for that matter, any relevant scientific discipline that would give her the background knowledge and skill set to take on analyzing the epidemiological literature regarding autism. Indeed, she is in the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory at MIT

First of all I am not "anti-vaccine", but don't let that get in the way of your pathetic attempts at character assassination. Even though there is no peer reviewed studies demonstrating the efficacy of vaccines I am willing to admit some of them MAY be helpful, however, that doesn't make EVERY vaccine and all of the ingredients safe or effective. Its nice to see you can step out in public and make arguments like a big boy though instead of leaving snide comments about your opinions on my feedback ratings. On second thought though, you are just linking some one else's opinion, not making any arguments of your own, so maybe that is giving you too much credit. Its a simple task to criticize people's opinions when you don't make any of your own arguments. Nice and safe from criticism, just how you like it.

http://www.inhabitots.com/mit-scientist-links-autism-to-monsantos-roundup-and-predicts-half-of-u-s-children-will-be-autistic-by-2025/

Of course you would be one to think you know better than MIT scientists tho...  

Seneff, it turns out, is an MIT scientist, but she is not a scientist with any expertise in autism, epidemiology, or, for that matter, any relevant scientific discipline that would give her the background knowledge and skill set to take on analyzing the epidemiological literature regarding autism.

Really? So what medical doctor is supposed to be the relevant scientific discipline for performing statistical analysis on a computer database? No. That would be a job for a computer scientist.

Reversal +2 points. I bet nubbins thinks he knows more than the CDC too: http://healthimpactnews.com/2015/obama-grants-immunity-to-cdc-whistleblower-on-measles-vaccine-link-to-autism/

[SamPatt]

Of course you would be one to think you know better than MIT scientists tho...  

Appeal to authority isn't very convincing.

[TECSHARE]

Of course you would be one to think you know better than MIT scientists tho...  

Appeal to authority isn't very convincing.

Sure just skip over the rest of the perfectly credible evidence and cherry pick little petty things like this to argue. Very convincing. BTW I was commenting more on Nubbins's arrogance than the evidence with that statement, so no, its not really a fallacy.

[nubbins]

If Thiomersal causes autism, why have autism rates continued to rise in first-world countries, even though Thiomersal has been removed from all childhood vaccines except the flu vaccine?

If MMR causes autism, why did autism rates skyrocket in Japan after they withdrew the MMR vaccine?

If having a job at MIT means you are infallible in all matters, why don't we hire MIT scientists to work on Bitcoin? Why do we listen to people who didn't go to MIT? Do people who get jobs at MIT automatically lose all their stupid prejudices and approach issues with fairness and rigor? Is that even measurable?

Even though there is no peer reviewed studies demonstrating the efficacy of vaccines I am willing to admit some of them MAY be helpful, however, that doesn't make EVERY vaccine and all of the ingredients safe or effective

This sentence is half hogwash and half sense. Let's rewrite it to make 100% sense:

Thousands of peer-reviewed studies prove, without a doubt, the efficacy of some vaccines. However, that doesn't make EVERY vaccine effective, or even necessary.

I will never get another flu shot as long as I live, nor will I receive a shot for the dreaded <insert this year's animal> flu. That's because those vaccines are /brand new/ and I do not trust people's work when (a) they're rushed and (b) there's a ton of money to be made.

The MMR vaccine is not brand new, and you are quite literally a fucking moron if you opt out of it for ANY reason other than the fact that it will specifically harm your child. Rubella caused 10,000 stillborn babies a year in the USA from 1962-1965.

The Polio vaccine is not brand new, and you are literally a child abuser if you choose not to immunize your child against it.

To be perfectly honest, I don't care if any of you even read this, because you've obviously all swallowed the red pill. I pray that none of you have children.

[TECSHARE]

Even though there is no peer reviewed studies demonstrating the efficacy of vaccines I am willing to admit some of them MAY be helpful, however, that doesn't make EVERY vaccine and all of the ingredients safe or effective

This sentence is half hogwash and half sense. Let's rewrite it to make 100% sense:

Thousands of peer-reviewed studies prove, without a doubt, the efficacy of some vaccines. However, that doesn't make EVERY vaccine effective, or even necessary.

If there are thousands of peer reviewed studies showing the efficacy of vaccines, you should have no problem citing one of them should you? Please do.

[nubbins]

I guess your Google is broken?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20980048

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21155091

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20692031


Maybe do a bit of homework your fuckin self:

http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/publications.htm

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=vaccine%20efficacy

Insert inane, distracting issues that TECSHARE has with these studies or their sources below:

[nubbins]

Also, unwatched. Have fun!

[hashman]

The Polio vaccine is not brand new, and you are literally a child abuser if you choose not to immunize your child against it.

Lets ignore the obvious freudian slip here and get right to the heart of the discussion.

Why are you upset sir Nubbins?