Reply to Measles Outbreak

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Measles Outbreak "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I’m a PP (close family members anti vax). Among other things, I think it’s hard to wrap one’s head around the that doing nothing can be more harmful than doing something — particularly when we don’t see the diseases or their consequences in everyday life.

There’s also an element of wanting to spare your infant or child — a literal miracle, more perfect than anything a human could create on their — own from contamination. Humans are fallible and small. Nature, and children as an expression of nature (or God, if you’re the praying type, which many are) have an inherent perfection. So injecting something human-made into this perfection feels wrong, corrupting, to many.

And while I sort of understand — as a parent I too have the impulse to preserve the infant/child’s state of grace— I’ve also lived in countries that don’t have the benefit of vaccinations. I know that while nature is a miracle, it has its own forms of corruption and contamination, which can be swift, merciless, and cruel.

But it’s hard to see this when we are still (mostly) benefiting from herd immunity. [/quote]

I agree with you.  [b]But there is one fact that's often omitted in these discussions. [/b] The overall quality of life, state of nutrition and access to medicine and healthcare and sanitation in many of these places where access to vaccination is also limited. Same was true in first world before the overall advancement in medicine, access to sanitation, antibiotics and many new antiviral medications and supplements.  [/quote]

Because it's not relevant, and you know it's not relevant.

In 1963, measles was infecting 800,000+ people per year in the US, and a vaccine was introduced.

Within 5 years, that was down to 22,000 per year, and still dropping. A 97% drop in a matter of years. Are you saying that this was due to a change in hygiene and nutrition? Why?

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32NvAvgC_Yo[/youtube][/quote]

[b]In 1963, most Americans were eating what we’d think of today as a minimally processed, whole food, “organic” diet. [/b]Round up hadn’t been invented yet. Kids played outside every day. We had indoor plumbing and clean water. We had antibiotics. Most kids were raised by their mothers or other caregivers, at home.

And thousands of children still died of childhood diseases.

What’s more, many thousands of kids were born with mental and physical disabilities each year and shuttled off to centralized care facilities, where they lived their shortened, disabled lives largely out of the public eye. It was considered the right thing to do at the time. [/quote]

Roundup isn't the only thing used. DDT insecticide was widely used before, and terrible herbicides like atrazine and paraquat.   Your first statement is more of an opinion.  We had lead pipes and lead paint, medications prescribed to pregnant women that caused birth defects, etc. [b] No doubt a lot of this contributed[/b] to the health problems in young children beyond infections with common diseases. [/quote] 'No doubt" the things that just pass through my untrained and uneducated mind are relevant and make sense, because I and my feelings are the center of the universe. :roll:

Data. Your feelings aren't relevant.[/quote]

Show me the data proving DDT, atrazine and paraquat are 100% safe and amazing for the health of humans.   :lol: [/quote]

Show me that atrazine and paraquat were in widespread use in 1963. [/quote]

Your IQ must be too high to figure out how to type into your browser, is it?

"
Atrazine and paraquat, both introduced in the late 1950s, represent a critical era in agricultural history, transitioning farming toward heavy chemical reliance while setting the stage for decades of health and environmental scandals. 
Atrazine (Introduced ~1958): Synthesized in 1955 and registered for use by Ciba-Geigy in 1958, atrazine revolutionized corn and sorghum farming as a pre- and post-emergent herbicide.
Paraquat (Introduced ~1950s/1962): Introduced commercially in the 1950s, it gained prominence in the early 1960s as a "revolutionary" herbicide for "no-till" farming to reduce soil erosion.
The Scandals & Controversies: While not widely recognized as a "scandal" in the 1950s—a time when chemical pesticides were widely hailed as scientific progress—the seeds of the current, massive scandals were sown during this period through:
Human Toxicity: Paraquat was discovered to be deadly to humans if ingested, with no antidote, leading to fatal poisoning cases shortly after its launch.
Environmental Persistence: The widespread, routine, and often unregulated application of these chemicals in the 1950s and 60s quickly led to water contamination.
Long-Term Health Risks: Later revelations showed that manufacturers were aware of mounting evidence of toxicity—particularly paraquat’s connection to Parkinson’s disease and atrazine's role as an endocrine disruptor—early in their adoption, but continued to market them heavily. 
Civil Eats
Civil Eats
 +7
The "Paraquat Pot" Scandal (1970s extension):
While the chemicals were introduced in the 50s, a major, related scandal occurred in the late 1970s, when the U.S. government funded the spraying of paraquat on Mexican marijuana fields. The resulting poisoned marijuana was illegally imported into the U.S., causing lung damage in users. 
UCSF Synapse
UCSF Synapse
 +3
Modern Legacy of the 50s:
Paraquat: Due to high toxicity (causing lung, kidney, and liver damage), it is banned in over 70 countries, including the EU. In the U.S., it is restricted to certified applicators, with thousands of lawsuits pending regarding its link to Parkinson’s disease.
Atrazine: Remains in use in the U.S., but has been heavily criticized for contaminating drinking water and acting as an endocrine disruptor that can "feminize" wildlife. 
Center for Food Safety
Center for Food Safety
 +4[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics