You see, I already know ALL of your arguments. If you’re good then you already know mine and then round we go. Ne’er the ‘tween shall meet.

My kids have NEVER had a drug in their lives. It’s not luck.

I’ve never been in a deadly car accident but I still wear my seatbelt. I have never had my house burn down but I still buy insurance. You have chosen the risks you wish to take. You have not explained your reasons for distrusting vaccines. As far as I can tell you are unwilling to explain what your problem is and you simply wish to throw out random irrelevant arguments such as:

I watched the PBS special on the polio vaccine…[edited for brevity]…The deceiving implication was that the fear of polio had school children running out of school houses en mass in 1955. THAT is PROPAGANDA.

So you saw a documentary and you felt that a single line of it was dishonest. And I’m absolutely positive that I can find you ooodles of intellectually dishonest anti-vax propaganda. Neither would change what is true and what isn’t

I’ll wait for your “free riding” objection and then we can discuss the unscientific portion of your beliefs.

So basically you are unwilling to present an argument and are hoping I’ll make some comment you can refute.

It’s been nice talking to you. If you have something interesting to add let me know.

Oh, and tell us (since you have so far avoided the question) all about the ethics of going to a hosting site that removed a science blog at the request of a cancer quack? We are all just dying to hear your opinion.

There are no ethics involved you dumbass. Its a straight up censorship issue which at the time was not even known to Pal. I only mentioned it since it might be a decent idea to do what Science Based Medicine does and use the engine itself on his own website.

Speaking of propaganda. I watched the PBS special on the polio vaccine and it had a random black and white film of chilren running out of a school building similiar to the last day of school excitement. But the narrator told a different story. As this portion of the film was showing, he was speaking on the fear of polio. The deceiving implication was that the fear of polio had school children running out of school houses en mass in 1955. THAT is PROPAGANDA.

I’m not interested in building herd immunity. I’m interested in raising a healthy family and that doesn’t involve 60 vaccines. There are plenty of parents who raise their children healthy and drug free. My kids have NEVER had a drug in their lives. It’s not luck.

I’ll wait for your “free riding” objection and then we can discuss the unscientific portion of your beliefs.

IDEA of vaccination instead of actually having to deal with objections.

Please do explain your objection.

The relative risk vs. benefit argument as you’ve given is a common straw man

Then you don’t know what a strawman argument is because comparing the risks and benefits of any medical procedure is not a strawman. A lower risk of contracting an illness that can kill you, by way of a vaccine that is very safe is a legitimate reason to consider a vaccine. A strawman is arguing that because a vaccine isn’t 100% effective, there is no merit to being vaccinated.

The “you haven’t seen what I’ve seen or therefore you’d..” argument is based in propaganda not facts.

I haven’t made this argument. You and I have same access to footage of people suffering from polio and I’m incredibly glad I haven’t experienced it. Are you suggesting that a vaccine is worse than polio (or whooping cough or measles)? I’m trying to understand which part is the propaganda.

The term herd immunity is much older than the term vaccines. I have no problem with herd immunity.

How are you proposing that herd immunity happens without vaccines?

But you better know the differences in vaccine before you start preaching about forced herd immunity.

I’m sorry, where did I say “forced herd immunity”? Do I feel that people who do not vaccinate are denying their child and their community a healthier better and safer life? Yes. Have I stated anywhere that vaccines should be mandated? No. What I’ve said is that your arguments so far, simple bolsters the claim that herd immunity would benefit society. If you know of another safe and effective way to build herd immunity, get to writing it up. There may be a nobel prize in it for you.

I was speaking specifically about pertussis vaccine. It is common for SBMers to speak of vaccineS instead of address the specifics of a particular vaccine and disease. This subconscious tactic speaks of their IDEA of vaccination instead of actually having to deal with objections.

The relative risk vs. benefit argument as you’ve given is a common straw man argument that is made by bloggers.

The “you haven’t seen what I’ve seen or therefore you’d..” argument is based in propaganda not facts.

Whatever your arguments are, you have not made any compelling case against vaccines you’ve only supported the argument that we need herd immunity.

The term herd immunity is much older than the term vaccines. I have no problem with herd immunity. But you better know the differences in vaccine before you start preaching about forced herd immunity.

Yes, I do understand how vaccines work. Given the choice between a vaccine which gives me symptom free or nearly symptom free immunity (for any period of time) instead of having to risk a full outbreak of a disease like, say, polio, pertussis, measles or flu, I will gladly choose the vaccine. Yes, vaccines aren’t 100% effective. Yes, you may still carry a disease that does not cause an outbreak, though clearly, if you are not spewing bodily fluids about, your risk of contaminating those unable to be vaccinated are greatly diminished. The reason polio is not the scourge it once was is because so many people are vaccinated. The evidence suggests strongly that vaccines are a more humanitarian and healthy route to immunity than waiting to get infected and hoping one’s body will manage to fight the disease and you will walk away unscathed.

The risk of illnesses like whooping cough are far far greater than any risk from the vaccine and most of us are exceedingly lucky that we haven’t experienced the fear, death and suffering that people used to see when these illnesses were more prevalent. Whatever your arguments are, you have not made any compelling case against vaccines you’ve only supported the argument that we need herd immunity.