Measles Outbreak

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

One obvious side effect of measles vaccination is that it let idiots like you live long enough to say completely stupid, made up crap.

The short bus has rolled in, everyone. Point and laugh.

What does your last paragraph about the short bus mean exactly?

You know what it means. Or you don’t. Antivaxxers aren’t known for their intelligence.

Yes, I do know. I’d like to hear from the poster why they needed to make a joke about people with disabilities to make their point. And instruct them to point and laugh. I’d like to hear what about that is funny to them? Exactly.

What’s funny? Nothing is funny about a stupid anti-vaxxer killing their kids. What’s funny is that they bought into the wellness grift and truly believe they are smart. Laugh at them folks. And maybe figure out a way to rip them off. If you tell these bone-beads they’re smart, they’ll empty your pockets for your snake oil.

Ok. Say that and leave people with disabilities out of it. No need to punch down. It ruins your credibility because you turn into an a-hole.

Anti-vaxxers are generally low intelligence or mentally ill, and low intelligence and mental illness are both disabilities. I’m absolutely punching down. Someone needs to put them in their place. The mommy bloggers and wellness grifters have them thinking they are smarter and saner than they have any claim to be, and as a result they are killing their kids.
If someone needs to remind them every day they are too low intelligence or too incompetent to be making decisions for themselves let alone innocent children, I am happy to be that ass*le.

Congratulations then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

One obvious side effect of measles vaccination is that it let idiots like you live long enough to say completely stupid, made up crap.

The short bus has rolled in, everyone. Point and laugh.

What does your last paragraph about the short bus mean exactly?

You know what it means. Or you don’t. Antivaxxers aren’t known for their intelligence.

Yes, I do know. I’d like to hear from the poster why they needed to make a joke about people with disabilities to make their point. And instruct them to point and laugh. I’d like to hear what about that is funny to them? Exactly.

What’s funny? Nothing is funny about a stupid anti-vaxxer killing their kids. What’s funny is that they bought into the wellness grift and truly believe they are smart. Laugh at them folks. And maybe figure out a way to rip them off. If you tell these bone-beads they’re smart, they’ll empty your pockets for your snake oil.

Ok. Say that and leave people with disabilities out of it. No need to punch down. It ruins your credibility because you turn into an a-hole.

Anti-vaxxers are generally low intelligence or mentally ill, and low intelligence and mental illness are both disabilities. I’m absolutely punching down. Someone needs to put them in their place. The mommy bloggers and wellness grifters have them thinking they are smarter and saner than they have any claim to be, and as a result they are killing their kids.
If someone needs to remind them every day they are too low intelligence or too incompetent to be making decisions for themselves let alone innocent children, I am happy to be that ass*le.

Congratulations then.

You can keep trying to reason people out of a position they never reasoned themselves into because they lack the capacity to reason. I personally don’t see the need to “gentle parent” adult toddlers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

One obvious side effect of measles vaccination is that it let idiots like you live long enough to say completely stupid, made up crap.

The short bus has rolled in, everyone. Point and laugh.

What does your last paragraph about the short bus mean exactly?

You know what it means. Or you don’t. Antivaxxers aren’t known for their intelligence.

Yes, I do know. I’d like to hear from the poster why they needed to make a joke about people with disabilities to make their point. And instruct them to point and laugh. I’d like to hear what about that is funny to them? Exactly.

What’s funny? Nothing is funny about a stupid anti-vaxxer killing their kids. What’s funny is that they bought into the wellness grift and truly believe they are smart. Laugh at them folks. And maybe figure out a way to rip them off. If you tell these bone-beads they’re smart, they’ll empty your pockets for your snake oil.

Ok. Say that and leave people with disabilities out of it. No need to punch down. It ruins your credibility because you turn into an a-hole.

Anti-vaxxers are generally low intelligence or mentally ill, and low intelligence and mental illness are both disabilities. I’m absolutely punching down. Someone needs to put them in their place. The mommy bloggers and wellness grifters have them thinking they are smarter and saner than they have any claim to be, and as a result they are killing their kids.
If someone needs to remind them every day they are too low intelligence or too incompetent to be making decisions for themselves let alone innocent children, I am happy to be that ass*le.

Congratulations then.

You can keep trying to reason people out of a position they never reasoned themselves into because they lack the capacity to reason. I personally don’t see the need to “gentle parent” adult toddlers.

I am pro vaccine so I understand the frustration with antivaxxer nuts. Why someone has to disrespect and ridicule people with disabilities to make a point, when they have been this society’s punching bag as it is, makes no sense and is cruel. I will call it out every time I see these (even self-proclaimed) a-holes do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

One obvious side effect of measles vaccination is that it let idiots like you live long enough to say completely stupid, made up crap.

The short bus has rolled in, everyone. Point and laugh.

What does your last paragraph about the short bus mean exactly?

You know what it means. Or you don’t. Antivaxxers aren’t known for their intelligence.

Yes, I do know. I’d like to hear from the poster why they needed to make a joke about people with disabilities to make their point. And instruct them to point and laugh. I’d like to hear what about that is funny to them? Exactly.

What’s funny? Nothing is funny about a stupid anti-vaxxer killing their kids. What’s funny is that they bought into the wellness grift and truly believe they are smart. Laugh at them folks. And maybe figure out a way to rip them off. If you tell these bone-beads they’re smart, they’ll empty your pockets for your snake oil.

Ok. Say that and leave people with disabilities out of it. No need to punch down. It ruins your credibility because you turn into an a-hole.

Anti-vaxxers are generally low intelligence or mentally ill, and low intelligence and mental illness are both disabilities. I’m absolutely punching down. Someone needs to put them in their place. The mommy bloggers and wellness grifters have them thinking they are smarter and saner than they have any claim to be, and as a result they are killing their kids.
If someone needs to remind them every day they are too low intelligence or too incompetent to be making decisions for themselves let alone innocent children, I am happy to be that ass*le.

Congratulations then.

You can keep trying to reason people out of a position they never reasoned themselves into because they lack the capacity to reason. I personally don’t see the need to “gentle parent” adult toddlers.

I am pro vaccine so I understand the frustration with antivaxxer nuts. Why someone has to disrespect and ridicule people with disabilities to make a point, when they have been this society’s punching bag as it is, makes no sense and is cruel. I will call it out every time I see these (even self-proclaimed) a-holes do it.

Ok, and I’m saying there’s some overlap there. And in the case of the anti-vaxxer nuts who also happen to be on life’s struggle bus, some punching down is necessary if we are going to save lives. These people who believe whatever they are told by a blogger cannot go through life thinking they are even remotely capable of “doing their own research.” My 8-year old could wipe the floor with them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

One obvious side effect of measles vaccination is that it let idiots like you live long enough to say completely stupid, made up crap.

The short bus has rolled in, everyone. Point and laugh.

This is a bit of a taboo topic, in that its very possible that vaccines are substituting fitness based mortality of resisting disease with what is essentially random mortality from injections. This is letting people make it to adulthood and reproduce that never would have done so before. While at the same time killing/crippling kids who would otherwise make it to adulthood unharmed. Is that a good thing? I bet you and I are in agreement here.

Thank you for bringing this up.

Not a single person has been killed by the MMR vaccine, and I’d venture to say the ones who were “crippled” by a few strains of some dead virus weren’t long for this world anyway. In a bit of news that is surprising to no one except low IQ antivaxxers, dysfunctional immune systems are dysfunctional. Sorry if one of your kids was one of the unfit - it must be terrifying knowing a real live virus could kill them. Or worse - the kind of huge “viral load” a kid gets in an average elementary school classroom in January.

But yes, in the past when people have refused to take common sense measures, Nature has been relentless. One of Benjamin Franklin’s great regrets was that he never inoculated his son against smallpox because he thought the boy was too weak. You can guess what happened next. (He got smallpox for real and died.)

Hopefully you didn’t pay for the AI that told you that. There are reported deaths in VAERS. The drug companies also admit it killed immunocompromised people which is why they aren’t given it anymore.

Oh yes, VAERS. Where guilty moms can blame vaccines when they smother their children to death in unsafe cosleeping arrangements. VAERS, where no truth or medical substantiation is required to submit to the database. That VAERS?

If you have a better data source I'm all ears. If not VAERS, then on what can you make claims of safety for the MMR vaccine, or really any vaccine?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

One obvious side effect of measles vaccination is that it let idiots like you live long enough to say completely stupid, made up crap.

The short bus has rolled in, everyone. Point and laugh.

This is a bit of a taboo topic, in that its very possible that vaccines are substituting fitness based mortality of resisting disease with what is essentially random mortality from injections. This is letting people make it to adulthood and reproduce that never would have done so before. While at the same time killing/crippling kids who would otherwise make it to adulthood unharmed. Is that a good thing? I bet you and I are in agreement here.

Thank you for bringing this up.

Not a single person has been killed by the MMR vaccine, and I’d venture to say the ones who were “crippled” by a few strains of some dead virus weren’t long for this world anyway. In a bit of news that is surprising to no one except low IQ antivaxxers, dysfunctional immune systems are dysfunctional. Sorry if one of your kids was one of the unfit - it must be terrifying knowing a real live virus could kill them. Or worse - the kind of huge “viral load” a kid gets in an average elementary school classroom in January.

But yes, in the past when people have refused to take common sense measures, Nature has been relentless. One of Benjamin Franklin’s great regrets was that he never inoculated his son against smallpox because he thought the boy was too weak. You can guess what happened next. (He got smallpox for real and died.)

Hopefully you didn’t pay for the AI that told you that. There are reported deaths in VAERS. The drug companies also admit it killed immunocompromised people which is why they aren’t given it anymore.

Oh yes, VAERS. Where guilty moms can blame vaccines when they smother their children to death in unsafe cosleeping arrangements. VAERS, where no truth or medical substantiation is required to submit to the database. That VAERS?

If you have a better data source I'm all ears. If not VAERS, then on what can you make claims of safety for the MMR vaccine, or really any vaccine?

How about peer reviewed research? By real Ph.Ds?

According to VAERS, vaccines have caused opiate overdoses, many suicides (grown adults, 20+ years later), teen acne, preexisting cat allergies to flare up, and an allergy to Korean food. In addition to the previously cited Hulk-itis and SIDS that isn’t SIDS at all but mommy smothering baby in bed.

I could file a claim today asserting the Covid vaccine caused my high blood pressure and you’d probably accept it as truth. The timing lines up.

But a researcher could determine with about 2 minutes of questions that my high blood pressure is actually an inevitable complication of a genetic disease that I have, and that has been affecting generations of my ancestors for longer than vaccines have been a thing. They might also figure out that I got lucky that the high blood pressure didn’t start for me until when it did, since my direct relatives all experienced it much younger.

It’s important to have a monitoring system, but there is no filter on VAERS for truth. Correlation does not equal causation. Sometimes it’s just a coincidence. Or, like, an heartbreaking attempt to avoid accountability for raising a junkie or smothering an infant by engaging in unsafe sleep practices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

One obvious side effect of measles vaccination is that it let idiots like you live long enough to say completely stupid, made up crap.

The short bus has rolled in, everyone. Point and laugh.

What does your last paragraph about the short bus mean exactly?

You know what it means. Or you don’t. Antivaxxers aren’t known for their intelligence.

Yes, I do know. I’d like to hear from the poster why they needed to make a joke about people with disabilities to make their point. And instruct them to point and laugh. I’d like to hear what about that is funny to them? Exactly.

What’s funny? Nothing is funny about a stupid anti-vaxxer killing their kids. What’s funny is that they bought into the wellness grift and truly believe they are smart. Laugh at them folks. And maybe figure out a way to rip them off. If you tell these bone-beads they’re smart, they’ll empty your pockets for your snake oil.

Ok. Say that and leave people with disabilities out of it. No need to punch down. It ruins your credibility because you turn into an a-hole.

Anti-vaxxers are generally low intelligence or mentally ill, and low intelligence and mental illness are both disabilities. I’m absolutely punching down. Someone needs to put them in their place. The mommy bloggers and wellness grifters have them thinking they are smarter and saner than they have any claim to be, and as a result they are killing their kids.
If someone needs to remind them every day they are too low intelligence or too incompetent to be making decisions for themselves let alone innocent children, I am happy to be that ass*le.

Congratulations then.

You can keep trying to reason people out of a position they never reasoned themselves into because they lack the capacity to reason. I personally don’t see the need to “gentle parent” adult toddlers.

I am pro vaccine so I understand the frustration with antivaxxer nuts. Why someone has to disrespect and ridicule people with disabilities to make a point, when they have been this society’s punching bag as it is, makes no sense and is cruel. I will call it out every time I see these (even self-proclaimed) a-holes do it.

Ok, and I’m saying there’s some overlap there. And in the case of the anti-vaxxer nuts who also happen to be on life’s struggle bus, some punching down is necessary if we are going to save lives. These people who believe whatever they are told by a blogger cannot go through life thinking they are even remotely capable of “doing their own research.” My 8-year old could wipe the floor with them.

You clearly don’t know what punching down means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

One obvious side effect of measles vaccination is that it let idiots like you live long enough to say completely stupid, made up crap.

The short bus has rolled in, everyone. Point and laugh.

What does your last paragraph about the short bus mean exactly?

You know what it means. Or you don’t. Antivaxxers aren’t known for their intelligence.

Yes, I do know. I’d like to hear from the poster why they needed to make a joke about people with disabilities to make their point. And instruct them to point and laugh. I’d like to hear what about that is funny to them? Exactly.

What’s funny? Nothing is funny about a stupid anti-vaxxer killing their kids. What’s funny is that they bought into the wellness grift and truly believe they are smart. Laugh at them folks. And maybe figure out a way to rip them off. If you tell these bone-beads they’re smart, they’ll empty your pockets for your snake oil.

Ok. Say that and leave people with disabilities out of it. No need to punch down. It ruins your credibility because you turn into an a-hole.

Anti-vaxxers are generally low intelligence or mentally ill, and low intelligence and mental illness are both disabilities. I’m absolutely punching down. Someone needs to put them in their place. The mommy bloggers and wellness grifters have them thinking they are smarter and saner than they have any claim to be, and as a result they are killing their kids.
If someone needs to remind them every day they are too low intelligence or too incompetent to be making decisions for themselves let alone innocent children, I am happy to be that ass*le.

Congratulations then.

You can keep trying to reason people out of a position they never reasoned themselves into because they lack the capacity to reason. I personally don’t see the need to “gentle parent” adult toddlers.

I am pro vaccine so I understand the frustration with antivaxxer nuts. Why someone has to disrespect and ridicule people with disabilities to make a point, when they have been this society’s punching bag as it is, makes no sense and is cruel. I will call it out every time I see these (even self-proclaimed) a-holes do it.

Ok, and I’m saying there’s some overlap there. And in the case of the anti-vaxxer nuts who also happen to be on life’s struggle bus, some punching down is necessary if we are going to save lives. These people who believe whatever they are told by a blogger cannot go through life thinking they are even remotely capable of “doing their own research.” My 8-year old could wipe the floor with them.

You clearly don’t know what punching down means.

I guess it’s “punching up” then? I can’t control their parenting choices. They hold the power to kill their babies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

One obvious side effect of measles vaccination is that it let idiots like you live long enough to say completely stupid, made up crap.

The short bus has rolled in, everyone. Point and laugh.

What does your last paragraph about the short bus mean exactly?

You know what it means. Or you don’t. Antivaxxers aren’t known for their intelligence.

Yes, I do know. I’d like to hear from the poster why they needed to make a joke about people with disabilities to make their point. And instruct them to point and laugh. I’d like to hear what about that is funny to them? Exactly.

What’s funny? Nothing is funny about a stupid anti-vaxxer killing their kids. What’s funny is that they bought into the wellness grift and truly believe they are smart. Laugh at them folks. And maybe figure out a way to rip them off. If you tell these bone-beads they’re smart, they’ll empty your pockets for your snake oil.

Ok. Say that and leave people with disabilities out of it. No need to punch down. It ruins your credibility because you turn into an a-hole.

Anti-vaxxers are generally low intelligence or mentally ill, and low intelligence and mental illness are both disabilities. I’m absolutely punching down. Someone needs to put them in their place. The mommy bloggers and wellness grifters have them thinking they are smarter and saner than they have any claim to be, and as a result they are killing their kids.
If someone needs to remind them every day they are too low intelligence or too incompetent to be making decisions for themselves let alone innocent children, I am happy to be that ass*le.

Congratulations then.

You can keep trying to reason people out of a position they never reasoned themselves into because they lack the capacity to reason. I personally don’t see the need to “gentle parent” adult toddlers.

I am pro vaccine so I understand the frustration with antivaxxer nuts. Why someone has to disrespect and ridicule people with disabilities to make a point, when they have been this society’s punching bag as it is, makes no sense and is cruel. I will call it out every time I see these (even self-proclaimed) a-holes do it.

Ok, and I’m saying there’s some overlap there. And in the case of the anti-vaxxer nuts who also happen to be on life’s struggle bus, some punching down is necessary if we are going to save lives. These people who believe whatever they are told by a blogger cannot go through life thinking they are even remotely capable of “doing their own research.” My 8-year old could wipe the floor with them.

You clearly don’t know what punching down means.

I guess it’s “punching up” then? I can’t control their parenting choices. They hold the power to kill their babies.

Still no. But hey, good news! You’re the a-hole you want to be!! Have a good night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

You don’t seriously believe any of this, do you?

[Anonymous]

Trying to slap some sense into antivaxxers is tough love.

Seems nothing else has worked so far so why not get more aggressive with them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

One obvious side effect of measles vaccination is that it let idiots like you live long enough to say completely stupid, made up crap.

The short bus has rolled in, everyone. Point and laugh.

This is a bit of a taboo topic, in that its very possible that vaccines are substituting fitness based mortality of resisting disease with what is essentially random mortality from injections. This is letting people make it to adulthood and reproduce that never would have done so before. While at the same time killing/crippling kids who would otherwise make it to adulthood unharmed. Is that a good thing? I bet you and I are in agreement here.

Thank you for bringing this up.

Not a single person has been killed by the MMR vaccine, and I’d venture to say the ones who were “crippled” by a few strains of some dead virus weren’t long for this world anyway. In a bit of news that is surprising to no one except low IQ antivaxxers, dysfunctional immune systems are dysfunctional. Sorry if one of your kids was one of the unfit - it must be terrifying knowing a real live virus could kill them. Or worse - the kind of huge “viral load” a kid gets in an average elementary school classroom in January.

But yes, in the past when people have refused to take common sense measures, Nature has been relentless. One of Benjamin Franklin’s great regrets was that he never inoculated his son against smallpox because he thought the boy was too weak. You can guess what happened next. (He got smallpox for real and died.)

Hopefully you didn’t pay for the AI that told you that. There are reported deaths in VAERS. The drug companies also admit it killed immunocompromised people which is why they aren’t given it anymore.

Oh yes, VAERS. Where guilty moms can blame vaccines when they smother their children to death in unsafe cosleeping arrangements. VAERS, where no truth or medical substantiation is required to submit to the database. That VAERS?

If you have a better data source I'm all ears. If not VAERS, then on what can you make claims of safety for the MMR vaccine, or really any vaccine?

How about peer reviewed research? By real Ph.Ds?

According to VAERS, vaccines have caused opiate overdoses, many suicides (grown adults, 20+ years later), teen acne, preexisting cat allergies to flare up, and an allergy to Korean food. In addition to the previously cited Hulk-itis and SIDS that isn’t SIDS at all but mommy smothering baby in bed.

I could file a claim today asserting the Covid vaccine caused my high blood pressure and you’d probably accept it as truth. The timing lines up.

But a researcher could determine with about 2 minutes of questions that my high blood pressure is actually an inevitable complication of a genetic disease that I have, and that has been affecting generations of my ancestors for longer than vaccines have been a thing. They might also figure out that I got lucky that the high blood pressure didn’t start for me until when it did, since my direct relatives all experienced it much younger.

It’s important to have a monitoring system, but there is no filter on VAERS for truth. Correlation does not equal causation. Sometimes it’s just a coincidence. Or, like, an heartbreaking attempt to avoid accountability for raising a junkie or smothering an infant by engaging in unsafe sleep practices.

So what research by these Ph.Ds support the claim that no one has ever died from the MMR vaccine?

[Anonymous]

Those of you on here who are anti-vax need to get a grip. You are a scourge on our society.

Here's the real deal- yes, vaccines have risks. The number of people who will experience a serious side effect of a vaccine is extremely small. There are multiple studies over many years that show this. Measles, mumps and rubella, on the other hand, are much more dangerous. There are multiple studies over many years that show this. These harms include:
Measles: High fever, severe rash, pneumonia, encephalitis (brain swelling), subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (fatal degenerative brain disease), and death.
Mumps: Parotid gland inflammation, encephalitis, meningitis, and permanent sterility (ovaries or testicles).
Rubella: Rash, fever, and severe, irreversible birth defects (Congenital Rubella Syndrome) if contracted during pregnancy.

Antivax people are shit people. You are selfish and stupid. You put your own children and EVERYONE ELSE at risk with your completely bullsh*t-based lies. F every single one of you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

One obvious side effect of measles vaccination is that it let idiots like you live long enough to say completely stupid, made up crap.

The short bus has rolled in, everyone. Point and laugh.

This is a bit of a taboo topic, in that its very possible that vaccines are substituting fitness based mortality of resisting disease with what is essentially random mortality from injections. This is letting people make it to adulthood and reproduce that never would have done so before. While at the same time killing/crippling kids who would otherwise make it to adulthood unharmed. Is that a good thing? I bet you and I are in agreement here.

Thank you for bringing this up.

Not a single person has been killed by the MMR vaccine, and I’d venture to say the ones who were “crippled” by a few strains of some dead virus weren’t long for this world anyway. In a bit of news that is surprising to no one except low IQ antivaxxers, dysfunctional immune systems are dysfunctional. Sorry if one of your kids was one of the unfit - it must be terrifying knowing a real live virus could kill them. Or worse - the kind of huge “viral load” a kid gets in an average elementary school classroom in January.

But yes, in the past when people have refused to take common sense measures, Nature has been relentless. One of Benjamin Franklin’s great regrets was that he never inoculated his son against smallpox because he thought the boy was too weak. You can guess what happened next. (He got smallpox for real and died.)

Hopefully you didn’t pay for the AI that told you that. There are reported deaths in VAERS. The drug companies also admit it killed immunocompromised people which is why they aren’t given it anymore.

Oh yes, VAERS. Where guilty moms can blame vaccines when they smother their children to death in unsafe cosleeping arrangements. VAERS, where no truth or medical substantiation is required to submit to the database. That VAERS?

If you have a better data source I'm all ears. If not VAERS, then on what can you make claims of safety for the MMR vaccine, or really any vaccine?

How about peer reviewed research? By real Ph.Ds?

According to VAERS, vaccines have caused opiate overdoses, many suicides (grown adults, 20+ years later), teen acne, preexisting cat allergies to flare up, and an allergy to Korean food. In addition to the previously cited Hulk-itis and SIDS that isn’t SIDS at all but mommy smothering baby in bed.

I could file a claim today asserting the Covid vaccine caused my high blood pressure and you’d probably accept it as truth. The timing lines up.

But a researcher could determine with about 2 minutes of questions that my high blood pressure is actually an inevitable complication of a genetic disease that I have, and that has been affecting generations of my ancestors for longer than vaccines have been a thing. They might also figure out that I got lucky that the high blood pressure didn’t start for me until when it did, since my direct relatives all experienced it much younger.

It’s important to have a monitoring system, but there is no filter on VAERS for truth. Correlation does not equal causation. Sometimes it’s just a coincidence. Or, like, an heartbreaking attempt to avoid accountability for raising a junkie or smothering an infant by engaging in unsafe sleep practices.

So what research by these Ph.Ds support the claim that no one has ever died from the MMR vaccine?

DP. If you research it (no...I mean real research, not listening to a blogger or a tik tok video), I don't think there are any verified DEATHS that have been directly attributed to the MMR vaccine. On the other hand, there are many deaths attributed to measles.

Now SDASU antivax loser POS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to interrupt this thrilling but completely irrelevant discussion of 1960s food but this is the actual problem.

The discussion of 1960s food was meant to refute a favorite anti-vaxxer talking point: that our “advancements” in food and sanitation led to the decline in measles deaths and complications, and not the fact that we started vaccinating people.

In short - the early 1960s was better in almost every way the crunchies value, and kids died. A lot of them. They didn’t stop dying en masse until we started vaccinating en masse. As we are seeing now, all the hygiene in the world isn’t moving the needle - we are seeing complications at the exact rate we’d expect from past experience.

Are you going to just pretend that measles deaths and infections weren't dropping going into the 1960s? What caused the death rate to go from 12/100k to 0.21/100k in the years prior to the vaccine? Why do you dismiss the 11.79/100k drop, while holding the 0.21 drop as some sort of miracle?

Why do you seem so determined to go back to where we had that many deaths? Were measles cases declining before the measles vaccine was introduced? Yes, they were—and that’s a fact worth acknowledging. But the rate of decline after vaccination dwarfed anything we saw before. While we saw gradual improvements over decades, the introduction of the vaccine in 1963 triggered a stunning 97% drop in just five years.

1. Measles was already heading towards elimination/near elimination without a vaccine. Maybe it would have taken to the 70s/80s to get there, but we would have gotten there.
2. The MMR vaccination is not without risk. Read the package insert. There may be additional risks that aren't covered in the insert that people are still trying to figure out.
3. It therefore becomes questionable if the measles vaccine actually results in a net increase in health over the long term.

One obvious side effect of measles vaccination is that it let idiots like you live long enough to say completely stupid, made up crap.

The short bus has rolled in, everyone. Point and laugh.

This is a bit of a taboo topic, in that its very possible that vaccines are substituting fitness based mortality of resisting disease with what is essentially random mortality from injections. This is letting people make it to adulthood and reproduce that never would have done so before. While at the same time killing/crippling kids who would otherwise make it to adulthood unharmed. Is that a good thing? I bet you and I are in agreement here.

Thank you for bringing this up.

Not a single person has been killed by the MMR vaccine, and I’d venture to say the ones who were “crippled” by a few strains of some dead virus weren’t long for this world anyway. In a bit of news that is surprising to no one except low IQ antivaxxers, dysfunctional immune systems are dysfunctional. Sorry if one of your kids was one of the unfit - it must be terrifying knowing a real live virus could kill them. Or worse - the kind of huge “viral load” a kid gets in an average elementary school classroom in January.

But yes, in the past when people have refused to take common sense measures, Nature has been relentless. One of Benjamin Franklin’s great regrets was that he never inoculated his son against smallpox because he thought the boy was too weak. You can guess what happened next. (He got smallpox for real and died.)

Hopefully you didn’t pay for the AI that told you that. There are reported deaths in VAERS. The drug companies also admit it killed immunocompromised people which is why they aren’t given it anymore.

Oh yes, VAERS. Where guilty moms can blame vaccines when they smother their children to death in unsafe cosleeping arrangements. VAERS, where no truth or medical substantiation is required to submit to the database. That VAERS?

If you have a better data source I'm all ears. If not VAERS, then on what can you make claims of safety for the MMR vaccine, or really any vaccine?

How about peer reviewed research? By real Ph.Ds?

According to VAERS, vaccines have caused opiate overdoses, many suicides (grown adults, 20+ years later), teen acne, preexisting cat allergies to flare up, and an allergy to Korean food. In addition to the previously cited Hulk-itis and SIDS that isn’t SIDS at all but mommy smothering baby in bed.

I could file a claim today asserting the Covid vaccine caused my high blood pressure and you’d probably accept it as truth. The timing lines up.

But a researcher could determine with about 2 minutes of questions that my high blood pressure is actually an inevitable complication of a genetic disease that I have, and that has been affecting generations of my ancestors for longer than vaccines have been a thing. They might also figure out that I got lucky that the high blood pressure didn’t start for me until when it did, since my direct relatives all experienced it much younger.

It’s important to have a monitoring system, but there is no filter on VAERS for truth. Correlation does not equal causation. Sometimes it’s just a coincidence. Or, like, an heartbreaking attempt to avoid accountability for raising a junkie or smothering an infant by engaging in unsafe sleep practices.

So what research by these Ph.Ds support the claim that no one has ever died from the MMR vaccine?

DP. If you research it (no...I mean real research, not listening to a blogger or a tik tok video), I don't think there are any verified DEATHS that have been directly attributed to the MMR vaccine. On the other hand, there are many deaths attributed to measles.

Now SDASU antivax loser POS.

So what you're saying is that if deaths in immunocompromised people don't count, and deaths reported to VAERS don't count, and then we don't look any further then we can conclude that the MMR vaccine didn't kill anyone? Is that correct?

Essentially the absence of evidence is evidence of absence then?