If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Ottawa Citizen)   Self-educated mothers everywhere are outraged that Canadians dropped Jenny McCarthy off a cancer benefit's roster, she claims it was due to autistic differences   (ottawacitizen.com) divider line 159
    More: Obvious, Jenny McCarthy, Bust a Move, Ottawa, Canadians, breast cancer awareness, incredible talent, fitness instructor, american actress  
•       •       •

5490 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Feb 2013 at 12:01 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



159 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-02 02:48:51 PM  

apoptotic: heinrich66: I am not conflating anything. I am expressing two different opinions.

Actually you're attributing a variety of different opinions, held by members of a disparate group, to the group as a whole and then using that to insinuate that makes all members of the group hypocrites.


Actually, I'm attributing the absence of a single expressed viewpoint (e.g. Hey, I can understand why an uneducated woman like J. McCarthy turn against vaccines given the excesses of Big Pharma and so much contradictory medical opinion) AS proof of a consensus view. In other words, the recurring McCarthy-is-a-COONT jibe.

Further proof is in the comments above.
 
2013-02-02 02:49:51 PM  

heinrich66: verbal_jizm: heinrich66: profit-driven vaccination

And here's how I know your "actual knowledge to bias" ratio on this subject. There is very little profit in vaccines. If you're worried about the profit motives of drug manufacturers influencing research or suppressing information about side effects, look at the drugs that target chronic conditions at a high incidence in the population. Those, at least, are big profit drivers for the pharmaceutical industry.

Wow. Really? No profits, eh? Or 'very little'? So Big Pharma lobby state legislatures to make, say, Gardasil mandatory is purely for the public good. Huh.


That may be one of the only vaccines that is being pushed for profit purposes. It does not apply to the common childhood vaccines and flu vaccine.
 
2013-02-02 02:50:43 PM  

heinrich66: Actually, I'm attributing the absence of a single expressed viewpoint (e.g. Hey, I can understand why an uneducated woman like J. McCarthy turn against vaccines given the excesses of Big Pharma and so much contradictory medical opinion) AS proof of a consensus view. In other words, the recurring McCarthy-is-a-COONT jibe.


I think that's because most of us form our opinions around facts rather then feelings and emotional responses to situations...well except for the politics tab, all bets are off there it seems.  Oh and threads involving Apple and/or Sony.
 
2013-02-02 02:54:45 PM  
verbal_jizm:

That may be one of the only vaccines that is being pushed for profit purposes. It does not apply to the common childhood vaccines and flu vaccine.

"One of the only"

For the record, I am not anti-vaccine or anti-science. Older vaccines that have a long track record (like the polio vaccine) I wouldn't think twice about having a kid of mine get. But some of the newer ones, given the all-encompassing urge for profits, as well as the sheer numbers of vaccines they seem to be advocating for...I'm glad I don't have to make that decision at the present time. Antibiotics have been handed out like candy for years. Now we're starting to see 'blowback' from that in the form of superbugs. I wonder if at some point there will be blowback from over-vaccination.
 
2013-02-02 02:55:45 PM  

heinrich66: I just love the cognitive dissonance in discussion threads like this one. Catch people at the right moment and they'll readily admit: a) that medical research contradicts itself all the time (see FARK headlines past six months), and b) Big Pharma and Big Media try to produce a new hysteria every year about swine/bird/Rhesus Bejesus Monkey Flu *just for big profits*. (Gardasil for boys anyone?)

Meanwhile, on the other side of the cognitive divide, Jenny McCarthy is a science-hating monster Medievalist who is now DIRECTLY responsible every time someone living in the Yukon doesn't get a MMR shot.

(Editor's Note: Half of these McCarthy-haters and vitriolists have previously shot other bodily fluids all over her virtual bazookas.)


How about you come to the real middle ground you purport to hold.

Do you pay attention to the folks that post 'meds are bullshiat plots'? They're actually different people than the ones advocating vaccination. You can't paint Fark with that broad of a brush.

Both my son and my daughter will be getting the hpv shot. Why would I not want my son's junk to be 90% protected by his own immune system?
If he wraps it up like I tell him to, he probably won't ever get hpv.
What the farking hell is stupid about that?
My insurance pays for it, too.

Editor's note: it's the body, not the person, you dumb bunny.
 
2013-02-02 02:56:43 PM  
Remember folks... incessant threadsh*tting is totes sexay, good for the environment AND helps reduce the national deficit.

God bless you all!
 
2013-02-02 03:00:07 PM  

heinrich66: So there's no relation between the industry that produces, say, Vioxx and the one that now is also producing an increasing variety of vaccines?


No, there isn't. You have one example of a vaccine being pushed for profit motives, which, by the way, is effective and has good science to back up it's use in adolescents. The common childhood vaccines have a long history of success and extremely low incidence of adverse effects (and more importantly, I'm pretty sure they're all no longer patented). It's not equivalent to the covering up by a drug company of safety concerns for a new drug that could be a billion dollar earner.
 
2013-02-02 03:00:43 PM  

heinrich66: I am not anti-vaccine or anti-science


Uh-huh.
 
2013-02-02 03:05:29 PM  

verbal_jizm: heinrich66: So there's no relation between the industry that produces, say, Vioxx and the one that now is also producing an increasing variety of vaccines?

No, there isn't. You have one example of a vaccine being pushed for profit motives, which, by the way, is effective and has good science to back up it's use in adolescents. The common childhood vaccines have a long history of success and extremely low incidence of adverse effects (and more importantly, I'm pretty sure they're all no longer patented). It's not equivalent to the covering up by a drug company of safety concerns for a new drug that could be a billion dollar earner.


I named one example. If you think that's exhaustive, then good for you. Another case of: Who are you going to believe, the for-profit drug corporations or your own lying eyes?
 
2013-02-02 03:06:30 PM  

verbal_jizm: heinrich66: I am not anti-vaccine or anti-science

Uh-huh.


Ah! You had me fooled for a minute. I thought you weren't a dipshiat. But there it is.
 
2013-02-02 03:09:03 PM  

verbal_jizm: heinrich66: So there's no relation between the industry that produces, say, Vioxx and the one that now is also producing an increasing variety of vaccines?

No, there isn't. You have one example of a vaccine being pushed for profit motives, which, by the way, is effective and has good science to back up it's use in adolescents. The common childhood vaccines have a long history of success and extremely low incidence of adverse effects (and more importantly, I'm pretty sure they're all no longer patented). It's not equivalent to the covering up by a drug company of safety concerns for a new drug that could be a billion dollar earner.


Okay, this is actually incorrect. However, there are multiple ways to make some of the vaccines for the same antigens so it's essentially like having a patent run out.
 
2013-02-02 03:11:18 PM  
verbal_jizm:

No, there isn't. You have one example of a vaccine being pushed for profit motives, which, by the way, is effective and has good science to back up it's use in adolescents. The common childhood vaccines have a long history of success and extremely low incidence of adverse effects (and more importantly, I'm pretty sure they're all no longer patented). It's not equivalent to the covering up by a drug company of safety concerns for a new drug that could be a billion dollar earner.

Vioxx pushed by Merck.
Gardasil pushed by Merck.

Nothing in common here! No reason to think that Vioxx might have been symptomatic, say, of an industry or any broader context pushing the edge when it comes to questionable products...

WITHOUT PROOF I AM NOT WILLING TO BELIEVE THAT SOULLESS CORPORATIONS WOULD BE WILLING TO SELL ME CRAP TO PUT INTO MY BODY WITH ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES DOWN THE ROAD. (Except for that Vioxx thing. Now name another!)
 
2013-02-02 03:11:23 PM  

heinrich66: verbal_jizm: heinrich66: I am not anti-vaccine or anti-science

Uh-huh.

Ah! You had me fooled for a minute. I thought you weren't a dipshiat. But there it is.


You didn't have me fooled. I saw you for the troll you were but I like to point out idiocy for others that might be reading and underinformed. Now I have to get back to the lab since my weakness for responding to trolls has to occasionally give way to work.
 
2013-02-02 03:17:08 PM  

heinrich66: verbal_jizm:

That may be one of the only vaccines that is being pushed for profit purposes. It does not apply to the common childhood vaccines and flu vaccine.

"One of the only"

For the record, I am not anti-vaccine or anti-science. Older vaccines that have a long track record (like the polio vaccine) I wouldn't think twice about having a kid of mine get. But some of the newer ones, given the all-encompassing urge for profits, as well as the sheer numbers of vaccines they seem to be advocating for...I'm glad I don't have to make that decision at the present time. Antibiotics have been handed out like candy for years. Now we're starting to see 'blowback' from that in the form of superbugs. I wonder if at some point there will be blowback from over-vaccination.


You wouldn't wonder if you were educated.

Antibiotics and vaccination are not the same thing. They don't work by the same mechanisms, they...

Oh, Fark it.
Get thine ass on wiki. Learn something. You seem to have understood the over-medicating of antibiotics, but the rise of use of anti-biotic soaps, cleaners, and the ubiquitous purell have greatly contributed to the problem.
And maybe you knew that. Would you learn more about vaccination? It would be good to have you on the side of science.
 
2013-02-02 03:24:57 PM  
verbal_jizm:

You didn't have me fooled. I saw you for the troll you were but I like to point out idiocy for others that might be reading and underinformed. Now I have to get back to the lab since my weakness for responding to trolls has to occasionally give way to work.

I could tell from your last few comments that you were trying to wank yourself off by indirectly convincing some people of your medical authority. The 'back to the lab' sealed it!

I earnestly hope that you aren't working in a lab. But then again, if you are, maybe it's all right. While you may or may not know anything about medicine (leaning toward the 'not' since you're here in this thread offering comments not much different from anyone else's) you clearly are not equipped to say much on such other wild topics as basic ethics (i.e. the ethics of piling onto J. McCarthy in an internet echo chamber while simultaneously mocking medical research *for all those to whom this applies*) and sociology/economics (i.e. the obvious state of affairs in which today 'Big Pharma' routinely puts the public good second to big profits).

You haven't had much of interest to say on these two points, busy as you were feeling out whether I was the usual anti-science straw man. But you did manage to assert that between Vioxx causing deaths and Gardasil being profit-driven (your characterization) there is still no reason to doubt the pharmaceutical industry. I won't dig into the endless information online, the horror stories, of profit going before public good. Making a guess, I bet you'd just come up with counter-evidence to say it isn't so or avoid that altogether. Good luck in the 'lab'.
 
2013-02-02 03:28:11 PM  
TheMysticS:

You wouldn't wonder if you were educated.

Antibiotics and vaccination are not the same thing. They don't work by the same mechanisms, they...

Oh, Fark it.
Get thine ass on wiki. Learn something. You seem to have understood the over-medicating of antibiotics, but the rise of use of anti-biotic soaps, cleaners, and the ubiquitous purell have greatly contributed to the problem.
And maybe you knew that. Would you learn more about vaccination? It would be good to have you on the side of science.


I wonder sometimes if people like you are ever ashamed. So the point here is that antibiotics and vaccination work by two different 'mechanisms'? Or that when a) Company A makes both antibiotics and vaccines; and b) Company B is in an industry with a track record of putting profits before lives there's reason to be skeptical?

There actually are people who only ever learned to reason or debate on the internet. You seem to be among them.
 
2013-02-02 03:43:25 PM  

apoptotic: Is this "Stupid Things Happen in Canada too" Day or something?


True story: More Canadians use Fark, per capita, than Americans.
 
2013-02-02 03:44:22 PM  

J. Frank Parnell: doubled99: She is smarter than most of you

Prepare to be trampled by the herd.

Way i look at it now, people who take any injection offered by drug manufacturers under flimsy justification without applying critical thinking is a form of Darwinism that can exist in our society now that we've removed all the natural ones, so is ultimately a good thing.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled 2 minutes hate. And encourage the more abusive and angry of you to double your injections. Major symptom of brain damage is arbitrary aggression and rage, but i'm sure that's just a coincidence.


You are displaying paranoid delusional traits.
 
2013-02-02 03:48:21 PM  

nickdaisy: First of all, autism is GROSSLY over diagnosed. The correct diagnosis in almost all cases is poor parenting. They're kids. Learn to deal with them.

Second of all, who cares if someone is stupid enough not to get a vaccine. It's a self correcting problem. As long as you're vaccinated, you have nothing to worry about.

Unless you're hoping the entire population be vaccinated so that the targeted disease can be eradicated and we don't need to vaccinate future generations.

Great idea, maybe we should also compel all people with genetic shortcomings to be sterilized.


You have displayed a vast ignorance about how vaccines work.

A vaccine is never 100% effective; they work solely because most people are supposed to have them. Herd immunity, it's how vaccines ALL work.
 
2013-02-02 03:57:50 PM  
How could someone so good looking be so stupid?
 
2013-02-02 04:19:45 PM  

the_chief: How could someone so good looking be so stupid?


Because looks aren't exactly correlated with intelligence.
 
2013-02-02 04:20:06 PM  

heinrich66: TheMysticS:

You wouldn't wonder if you were educated.

Antibiotics and vaccination are not the same thing. They don't work by the same mechanisms, they...

Oh, Fark it.
Get thine ass on wiki. Learn something. You seem to have understood the over-medicating of antibiotics, but the rise of use of anti-biotic soaps, cleaners, and the ubiquitous purell have greatly contributed to the problem.
And maybe you knew that. Would you learn more about vaccination? It would be good to have you on the side of science.

I wonder sometimes if people like you are ever ashamed. So the point here is that antibiotics and vaccination work by two different 'mechanisms'? Or that when a) Company A makes both antibiotics and vaccines; and b) Company B is in an industry with a track record of putting profits before lives there's reason to be skeptical?

There actually are people who only ever learned to reason or debate on the internet. You seem to be among them.


I'm not even sure what that last paragraph is supposed to mean. It seems to apply to you more than me.

Of course skepticism is healthy. But you didn't even phrase your sentence correctly. I did not say that company a that makes both antibiotics and vaccines and company b is in an industry of putting profits before lives should give one reason to be skeptical. I think what you meant to ask was:

Given company a makes antibiotics and vaccines

And

Given company b that is in the same industry as company a, and company b puts profits before lives

Therefore, don't you think that's a reason to be skeptical of the whole industry?

If not, you'd better re-phrase, because what you said made no sense. Re-read it out loud to yourself. See what I mean?
I never said that.

And the point of antibiotics and vaccines working by different 'mechanisms' was a dumbed-down way of speaking, and I apologize if that offended you.

Vaccines help your immune system learn what is dangerous, so that if that particular nasty (please forgive my non-scientific term) enters your system, it will know ahead of time how to deal with it, before it causes a severe problem, and compromises the system as a whole.
Antibiotics are differing formulas or substances that have been distilled and or synthesized to make a very potent version of what mother nature has provided.
You take these when your immune system can no longer handle the over-run of a bacterial infection, for many diverse reasons.

So, are they both involved in helping your immune system? Sure. Just not in the same way.


Are you trying to say that since company a manufactures both vaccines and antibiotics, that we should be suspect of their motives? If so, why? All I can draw in a conclusion is that maybe you suspect the vaccines cause the illnesses that antibiotics treat; therefore they have a scam running where they sell us the disease and the cure?

The point of my post was to say that you seem to understand that the over-prescribing of antibiotics has caused and is causing a big problem. You just can't pluck that out of thin air, so I assume you've read up on the subject.

But you seem to have less knowledge of vaccines and their purpose.
My point is read up. Don't fall prey to all of the bullshiat 'information' about vaccines that has been de-bunked, like Jenny has.


And as far as shame goes, maybe you should look in the mirror. Your post reads terribly. It's confusing , insulting and vague.

It's almost as if you learned to argue your points solely on the internet.

/swag yolo zomg
 
2013-02-02 04:45:38 PM  

TheMysticS: heinrich66: TheMysticS:

You wouldn't wonder if you were educated.

Antibiotics and vaccination are not the same thing. They don't work by the same mechanisms, they...

Oh, Fark it.
Get thine ass on wiki. Learn something. You seem to have understood the over-medicating of antibiotics, but the rise of use of anti-biotic soaps, cleaners, and the ubiquitous purell have greatly contributed to the problem.
And maybe you knew that. Would you learn more about vaccination? It would be good to have you on the side of science.

I wonder sometimes if people like you are ever ashamed. So the point here is that antibiotics and vaccination work by two different 'mechanisms'? Or that when a) Company A makes both antibiotics and vaccines; and b) Company B is in an industry with a track record of putting profits before lives there's reason to be skeptical?

There actually are people who only ever learned to reason or debate on the internet. You seem to be among them.

I'm not even sure what that last paragraph is supposed to mean. It seems to apply to you more than me.

Of course skepticism is healthy. But you didn't even phrase your sentence correctly. I did not say that company a that makes both antibiotics and vaccines and company b is in an industry of putting profits before lives should give one reason to be skeptical. I think what you meant to ask was:

Given company a makes antibiotics and vaccines

And

Given company b that is in the same industry as company a, and company b puts profits before lives

Therefore, don't you think that's a reason to be skeptical of the whole industry?

If not, you'd better re-phrase, because what you said made no sense. Re-read it out loud to yourself. See what I mean?
I never said that.

And the point of antibiotics and vaccines working by different 'mechanisms' was a dumbed-down way of speaking, and I apologize if that offended you.

Vaccines help your immune system learn what is dangerous, so that if that particular nasty (please forgive my non-scientific term) enters your system, it will know ahead of time how to deal with it, before it causes a severe problem, and compromises the system as a whole.
Antibiotics are differing formulas or substances that have been distilled and or synthesized to make a very potent version of what mother nature has provided.
You take these when your immune system can no longer handle the over-run of a bacterial infection, for many diverse reasons.

So, are they both involved in helping your immune system? Sure. Just not in the same way.


Are you trying to say that since company a manufactures both vaccines and antibiotics, that we should be suspect of their motives? If so, why? All I can draw in a conclusion is that maybe you suspect the vaccines cause the illnesses that antibiotics treat; therefore they have a scam running where they sell us the disease and the cure?

The point of my post was to say that you seem to understand that the over-prescribing of antibiotics has caused and is causing a big problem. You just can't pluck that out of thin air, so I assume you've read up on the subject.

But you seem to have less knowledge of vaccines and their purpose.
My point is read up. Don't fall prey to all of the bullshiat 'information' about vaccines that has been de-bunked, like Jenny has.


And as far as shame goes, maybe you should look in the mirror. Your post reads terribly. It's confusing , insulting and vague.

It's almost as if you learned to argue your points solely on the internet.

/swag yolo zomg


Oh, and btw, in case you doubt my skeptic cred is lacking- despite being the best target market for statins (other than being a woman, for which no studies were done before marketing) I'm not taking them.
If they don't prevent heart disease, or prevent heart attacks, what's the point?
They're only an effective plan to repair heart disease problems realted to cholesterol levels, and newer research suggests that cholesterol's mechanisms are not well understood.

Does that help?
Or are you just trolling along?
 
2013-02-02 04:47:05 PM  
Good, lord, y'all. Sorry about the wall o'text. Sometimes I forget that quoting on the phone re-posts EVERYTHING.
 
2013-02-02 05:06:22 PM  
verbal_jizm:

heinrich66: profit-driven vaccination

And here's how I know your "actual knowledge to bias" ratio on this subject.


Yeah, that's about as big fat a blinking red flag saying "I got my understanding of a complex topic off a mommy blog" as could ever be crafted.
 
2013-02-02 05:21:53 PM  

Fedora: Hadn't checked lately.  Congrats to Jenny.  She broke 1000.

http://www.jennymccarthybodycount.com/Anti-Vaccine_Body_Count/Home.h tm l


That website is of really poor taste, regardless of everything else.
 
2013-02-02 05:27:49 PM  

tuna fingers: Fedora: Hadn't checked lately.  Congrats to Jenny.  She broke 1000.

http://www.jennymccarthybodycount.com/Anti-Vaccine_Body_Count/Home.h tm l

That website is of really poor taste, regardless of everything else.


Oh, look, another anti-vaxxer white knighting for Jenny McCarthy. Don't you ever get tired of being fed a steady diet of bullshiat? You're going to starve your brain.
 
2013-02-02 05:42:17 PM  
heinrich66 actually arguing valid points

everyone else piling on with their ignorance by calling their position "backed by science"

cocksuckers can't even comprehend heinreich's point about blowback (unaticipated effects), of which there is ample scientific evidence of in the world of medicine and its offshoot the pharma industry

I used to spend 100's of hours on forums like this and had similar "science is on my side" views.

thank god I also read books, because I finally happened across one that honestly discussed the human condition and science. it changed my life, and reinvigorated me intellectually.

thank god I'm not one of your shiat-for-brains mainstream internet shut-ins who thinks wikipedia is a trustworthy source of information. I'm no longer under the delusion that my opinions are well-informed despite having knowledge restricted to the work of modern-day social scientists (LOL) and other politically or profit-expedient science.

I'm most especially glad to recognize that yes, living as a hermit doing nothing productive does mean that you shouldn't express opinions about anything except the smell of your own ballsack.
Damned fools.

read books. realize that there are no wizards with secret capabilities you can't comprehend (ie your belief in 'experts').
 
2013-02-02 05:51:05 PM  
Holy shiat either there are tons of antivaxer farkers or it's one guy with a bunch of alts.
 
2013-02-02 05:52:53 PM  

A Terrible Human: Holy shiat either there are tons of antivaxer farkers or it's one guy with a bunch of alts.


I'm going with the one guy and lots of sock puppets myself.
 
2013-02-02 05:59:15 PM  
But every dark tunnel has a light of hope
So don't hang yourself, with a celibate rope
 
2013-02-02 06:20:11 PM  

Night2o1: thank god I also read books, because I finally happened across one that honestly discussed the human condition and science. it changed my life, and reinvigorated me intellectually.


Yeah, that wouldn't happen to be the Urantia Book, would it?
 
2013-02-02 06:36:52 PM  
I've noticed that whenever some speaks up about what they believe in and there is a lot of people who are against what is being said, the more true the what is being said. So in Jenny's case, the more opponents she has, the more likely that what she says is true.
 
2013-02-02 06:40:28 PM  

Night2o1: read books. realize that there are no wizards with secret capabilities you can't comprehend (ie your belief in 'experts').


Yes and no. You can theoretically comprehend whatever you attempt to if you're intelligent enough; however, frequently this would take years of study and dedicated effort usually while learning from other experts. So while you can comprehend the inner workings of a cancer cell down to a molecular signalling and genetic level, or how an MRI produces images, or how to successfully set off nuclear fission, or 1000's of other things, there is a very wide gulf between being able to understand and actually understanding. Experts have value - they didn't just receive their knowledge de novo. We don't live long enough to become well versed in the whole of human understanding and couldn't keep up with every field even if we did. At some point you have to defer to the people who have put in the work.
 
2013-02-02 06:42:26 PM  

Night2o1: read books. realize that there are no wizards with secret capabilities you can't comprehend (ie your belief in 'experts').


I read a book once. It gave me polio, smallpox, genital warts AND lock jaw.

FOOKIN' BOOKS!!!
 
2013-02-02 06:47:13 PM  

blanchae: I've noticed that whenever some speaks up about what they believe in and there is a lot of people who are against what is being said, the more true the what is being said. So in Jenny's case, the more opponents she has, the more likely that what she says is true.


I'm pretty sure that's not how reality works.
 
2013-02-02 06:47:23 PM  

blanchae: I've noticed that whenever some speaks up about what they believe in and there is a lot of people who are against what is being said, the more true the what is being said. So in Jenny's case, the more opponents she has, the more likely that what she says is true.


You've opened my eyes! Those guys in the KKK are nearly universally reviled, but I bet it's just because they're right about everything. Same with the Westboro Baptist folks, could they have more opponents? They must have some powerful insight. Everyone also calls flat-earthers, birthers, truthers, moon-landing deniers, and psychics out as lunatics, but all those sheeple are just trying to keep the correct ideas down.
 
2013-02-02 06:50:07 PM  

blanchae: I've noticed that whenever some speaks up about what they believe in and there is a lot of people who are against what is being said, the more true the what is being said. So in Jenny's case, the more opponents she has, the more likely that what she says is true.


Soooo true.

I keep saying ya'll should suck my dick but everyone is all like "NAW!! WE SHOULDN'T BE SUCKIN' ON THAT NASTY OLD THANG!!!"

Therefore ya'll should be suckin' my dick.
 
2013-02-02 06:50:21 PM  

blanchae: I've noticed that whenever some speaks up about what they believe in and there is a lot of people who are against what is being said, the more true the what is being said. So in Jenny's case, the more opponents she has, the more likely that what she says is true.


You're getting really boring. I realize you're probably just the same loser posting over and over again in this thread, but you're going to have to learn to mix it up a bit before you can get more bites than this paltry sum.
 
2013-02-02 06:58:46 PM  

BumpInTheNight: I'm going with the one guy and lots of sock puppets myself.


Yeah I'm going with that too since I notice the same group of people in various threads.
 
2013-02-02 07:21:03 PM  

heinrich66: verbal_jizm:

You didn't have me fooled. I saw you for the troll you were but I like to point out idiocy for others that might be reading and underinformed. Now I have to get back to the lab since my weakness for responding to trolls has to occasionally give way to work.

I could tell from your last few comments that you were trying to wank yourself off by indirectly convincing some people of your medical authority. The 'back to the lab' sealed it!

I earnestly hope that you aren't working in a lab. But then again, if you are, maybe it's all right. While you may or may not know anything about medicine (leaning toward the 'not' since you're here in this thread offering comments not much different from anyone else's) you clearly are not equipped to say much on such other wild topics as basic ethics (i.e. the ethics of piling onto J. McCarthy in an internet echo chamber while simultaneously mocking medical research *for all those to whom this applies*) and sociology/economics (i.e. the obvious state of affairs in which today 'Big Pharma' routinely puts the public good second to big profits).

You haven't had much of interest to say on these two points, busy as you were feeling out whether I was the usual anti-science straw man. But you did manage to assert that between Vioxx causing deaths and Gardasil being profit-driven (your characterization) there is still no reason to doubt the pharmaceutical industry. I won't dig into the endless information online, the horror stories, of profit going before public good. Making a guess, I bet you'd just come up with counter-evidence to say it isn't so or avoid that altogether. Good luck in the 'lab'.


Oh my. That's some primo trolling there.
 
2013-02-02 08:27:18 PM  
My only question is why she was invited in the first place.
 
2013-02-02 08:28:56 PM  

blanchae: I've noticed that whenever some speaks up about what they believe in and there is a lot of people who are against what is being said, the more true the what is being said. So in Jenny's case, the more opponents she has, the more likely that what she says is true.


Damn, Hitler was right on the money with his whole people-oven, master race schtick then! Who knew?

And the WBC evidently knows exactly what God hates.

And your post might just be the single dumbest thing I have ever read on Fark. And I've been to the Politics Tab.
 
2013-02-02 08:30:29 PM  

Occam's Disposable Razor: blanchae: I've noticed that whenever some speaks up about what they believe in and there is a lot of people who are against what is being said, the more true the what is being said. So in Jenny's case, the more opponents she has, the more likely that what she says is true.

You've opened my eyes! Those guys in the KKK are nearly universally reviled, but I bet it's just because they're right about everything. Same with the Westboro Baptist folks, could they have more opponents? They must have some powerful insight. Everyone also calls flat-earthers, birthers, truthers, moon-landing deniers, and psychics out as lunatics, but all those sheeple are just trying to keep the correct ideas down.


Okay, so you beat me to the WBC. BUT I HAD HITLER, DAMMIT!!
 
2013-02-02 08:40:31 PM  
The Autism Society is not thrilled about this....they will have a comment sometime in the near future
 
2013-02-02 08:58:41 PM  

namegoeshere: Okay, so you beat me to the WBC. BUT I HAD HITLER, DAMMIT!!


I had to fight the urge to Godwin. It was pulling at me. But yeah, truly idiotic statement.
 
2013-02-02 11:42:20 PM  

James F. Campbell: That website is of really poor taste, regardless of everything else.

Oh, look, another anti-vaxxer white knighting for Jenny McCarthy. Don't you ever get tired of being fed a steady diet of bullshiat? You're going to starve your brain.


Anti-vaxxers are tards, and the website is in poor taste.  JM is inexcusably ignorant, and an embarrassment to our species.  However, the actual parents who decide not to vaccinate their kids because they believe the ravings of an idiot are much more responsible for their childrens' deaths.
 
2013-02-02 11:58:30 PM  
Well, you can take your opinion and stick it where the sun don't shine.
My husband suffers from Rheumatiod Arthritis, and is brave enough to risk his life by taking Humira. No one knows what the long-term effects of this therapy will be, but it has provided him some relief from a pain-filled day from the day he was 15, 46 now.
If he contracts tuberculosis, he will die. My kids cannot get their chicken-pox boosters, because it's a live vaccine. We can't get flu spray for the same reason. He basically has to live like an AIDS or cancer patient- also folks that get put at risk from non-vaccinators.

I doubt you'd like to have a lingering disease, because you sure talk like you've never experienced it for yourself or for a loved one.

If you're trolling, good jerb.
If not, maybe I should wish a chronic disease on you, or some
one you love.
Nah, I wouldn't wish daily suffering on the worst of humanity.
And that does not include you, but you are like an electron, spinning around the nucleus of selfishness and derp that is currently the bane of a peaceful planet.

Get some real education. Like from a textbook. Not from some celebrity.


Beautifully written.  Severe RA is terrible and your husband (especially since he had such had early onset) deserves every scrap of relief he can get (although it's true, the treatments wreak hell with your immune system).  It's also a great argument for general vaccination since if your kids can't get vaccinated, having everyone around them vaccinated will protect them (by extension your husband) via herd immunity.

Best of luck to you all.
/hugs
 
2013-02-03 12:38:06 AM  
For the record, I am not anti-vaccine or anti-science. Older vaccines that have a long track record (like the polio vaccine) I wouldn't think twice about having a kid of mine get. But some of the newer ones, given the all-encompassing urge for profits, as well as the sheer numbers of vaccines they seem to be advocating for...I'm glad I don't have to make that decision at the present time. Antibiotics have been handed out like candy for years. Now we're starting to see 'blowback' from that in the form of superbugs. I wonder if at some point there will be blowback from over-vaccination.

I work in vaccine research and, despite the fact that I am involved in research to create a new vaccine, I share your trepidation about over vaccination.  "Old" vaccines have track records and reduce the incidence of potentially fatal illnesses (especially in childhood).  Yes there are side effects, yes (very rarely) they can be dangerous or fatal, but we've seen that stopping vaccination causes more disease and death than vaccinations themselves do.

So shouldn't we just vaccinate against everything?  I don't think we know enough about EXACTLY what vaccines are doing to answer that.  Our immune systems evolved to protect us and when it gets messed up it can get messed up badly.  Protect against something that can kill you, go for it.  Protect against the common cold, we're probably better off all stocking up on tissues and chicken soup and letting nature take it's course.

About Gardasil though...Big Pharma profiteering or not, it's a good idea.  Numbers differ but 95-98% of cervical cancers are caused by two of the strains it protects against.  And cervical cancer is hard to detect and hard to treat.  And has a high mortality rate.  So vaccination really does protect against a fatal disease...just one that takes a long time to kill.  And vaccinating boys protects unvaccinated girls and contributes to herd immunity (enough vaccinated people protecting the unvaccinated by severely reducing the chance they will contract the disease).

/hope that was helpful...or at least educational, and not preachy or trolly
 
2013-02-03 12:56:43 AM  

doubled99: She is smarter than most of you


No.  No she is not.
 
Displayed 50 of 159 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report