Would you trust the h1n1 shot after this...

[Aidan's Mummy]

PB isn't a know it all she just has a great knowledge of science and how it works. She was fed up of seeing science misinterpreted. She made really good points and didn't say anyone was right or wrong. I have seen in this thread that when someone comes with any kind of valid counter argument as to why vaccinations are safe or it can't prove they arnt they get rudness.
Xx

 

[blutea]

PB isn't a know it all she just has a great knowledge of science and how it works. She was fed up of seeing science misinterpreted. She made really good points and didn't say anyone was right or wrong. I have seen in this thread that when someone comes with any kind of valid counter argument as to why vaccinations are safe or it can't prove they arnt they get rudness.
Xx

You seem to defend everyone who is pro vaccine and acts judgemental on this thread. She was obviously being rude to me. Of course you are not offended, she was not addressing you.

 

[Aidan's Mummy]

I would defend anyone. She wasn't being rude she stated she was fed up of science being misinterpreted which on many cases pro and anti vaccine they are. Many people try and twist science to suit them. Again both sides do this. Now I really do.not feel like an argument. I was merely trying to point out she wasn't trying to be patronizing or rude.
Xx

 

[blutea]

I would defend anyone. She wasn't being rude she stated she was fed up of science being misinterpreted which on many cases pro and anti vaccine they are. Many people try and twist science to suit them. Again both sides do this. Now I really do.not feel like an argument. I was merely trying to point out she wasn't trying to be patronizing or rude.
Xx

Hummmm...yes, she was rude and she has been in prior messages too. I don't want to argue either but I don't like being patronized and I do feel that she was doing this.

Peanut Bean- Do you care to clarify?

 

[lisaf]

Peanut Bean will probably come in and clarify, but as she stated before, she is a member of the scientific community.
So every comment about how scientific studies say 'may' or 'might' that is interpreted to mean that the data discovered in the study is therefore untrustworthy bothered her.

She snapped a little, yes, but people keep saying that things have to be proven 100% until you accept them. We keep explaining that science never CAN say anything is 100% safe because the population is too varied to say its safe for everyone.

I think we all can agree that having to repeat yourself and repeatedly defend yourself is frustrating!

 

[blutea]

Peanut Bean will probably come in and clarify, but as she stated before, she is a member of the scientific community.
So every comment about how scientific studies say 'may' or 'might' that is interpreted to mean that the data discovered in the study is therefore untrustworthy bothered her.

She snapped a little, yes, but people keep saying that things have to be proven 100% until you accept them. We keep explaining that science never CAN say anything is 100% safe because the population is too varied to say its safe for everyone.

I think we all can agree that having to repeat yourself and repeatedly defend yourself is frustrating!

Yes, it is frustrating! I have always explained that this is my choice for my family based on what I know and what my experiences with vaccines have been. I do not expect others to do as I do and take me word for it. But, I truely feel vaccines need to be safer and more effective before I could ever consider them again. That is pretty much the just of my defense and I have stated it time and time again. Your choice is your choice. I just feel the tone she expressed could have been left out of it. She's taking the whole science issue very personal and in turn personally judging others.

 

[Justagirlxx]

In fact, lol... I think the risk sheets for the vaccines should also list the risks of getting the disease and give the statistics for both. I think that would be very useful information.

It would be fantastic if they listed the risks of disease because then people could make an informed decision. In my humble opinion, more people would probably choose not to vaccinate if they knew the true disease statics against the true adverse reactions rates of vaccines.

Bluetea...you took the words out of my mouth!

 

[lisaf]

I think overall we've ALL been very good at overlooking the occasional tone or two.
I think both sides occasionally take something personally that wasn't meant to be that way. I'm pretty proud of how civil this has been, lol!

Your response was rather harsh to her though blutea.... much ruder than hers if you ask me

 

[lisaf]

In fact, lol... I think the risk sheets for the vaccines should also list the risks of getting the disease and give the statistics for both. I think that would be very useful information.

It would be fantastic if they listed the risks of disease because then people could make an informed decision. In my humble opinion, more people would probably choose not to vaccinate if they knew the true disease statics against the true adverse reactions rates of vaccines.

Bluetea...you took the words out of my mouth!

They cant' list the rate of actual infection from the disease... because as every parent decides to vaccinate or not, that rate will change. If everyone sees that X disease is so rare that they dont' want the vaccine, then that rare disease may come back as we've seen lately in some places.

However, the rate of injury or death from the disease itself is important information to give... as well as chance of contracting it if exposed (not all diseases are HIGHLY communicable).

 

[Blah11]

omg blutea How incredibly rude!

 

[Blah11]

In fact, lol... I think the risk sheets for the vaccines should also list the risks of getting the disease and give the statistics for both. I think that would be very useful information.

It would be fantastic if they listed the risks of disease because then people could make an informed decision. In my humble opinion, more people would probably choose not to vaccinate if they knew the true disease statics against the true adverse reactions rates of vaccines.

Does it not occur to you that the disease prevelance is so low because most people vaccinate?

 

[Blah11]

In fact, lol... I think the risk sheets for the vaccines should also list the risks of getting the disease and give the statistics for both. I think that would be very useful information.

It would be fantastic if they listed the risks of disease because then people could make an informed decision. In my humble opinion, more people would probably choose not to vaccinate if they knew the true disease statics against the true adverse reactions rates of vaccines.

Bluetea...you took the words out of my mouth!

They cant' list the rate of actual infection from the disease... because as every parent decides to vaccinate or not, that rate will change. If everyone sees that X disease is so rare that they dont' want the vaccine, then that rare disease may come back as we've seen lately in some places.

However, the rate of injury or death from the disease itself is important information to give... as well as chance of contracting it if exposed (not all diseases are HIGHLY communicable).

Oh you bet me to it LOL. I concur though

 

[blutea]

In fact, lol... I think the risk sheets for the vaccines should also list the risks of getting the disease and give the statistics for both. I think that would be very useful information.

It would be fantastic if they listed the risks of disease because then people could make an informed decision. In my humble opinion, more people would probably choose not to vaccinate if they knew the true disease statics against the true adverse reactions rates of vaccines.

Bluetea...you took the words out of my mouth!

They cant' list the rate of actual infection from the disease... because as every parent decides to vaccinate or not, that rate will change. If everyone sees that X disease is so rare that they dont' want the vaccine, then that rare disease may come back as we've seen lately in some places.

However, the rate of injury or death from the disease itself is important information to give... as well as chance of contracting it if exposed (not all diseases are HIGHLY communicable).

I don't agree with using just partial negative disease information because that would be just another scare tactic. I'm sure it is possible to offer estimated risks of both vaccines and disease. Then, they would would have more motivation to keep accurate up to date information.

 

[Blue_bumpkin]

In fact, lol... I think the risk sheets for the vaccines should also list the risks of getting the disease and give the statistics for both. I think that would be very useful information.

It would be fantastic if they listed the risks of disease because then people could make an informed decision. In my humble opinion, more people would probably choose not to vaccinate if they knew the true disease statics against the true adverse reactions rates of vaccines.

Bluetea...you took the words out of my mouth!

yes Id like to see those statistics too, along with a pre vaccine versus post vaccine introduction comparison. Im sure there will be a massive difference.

I dont feel PB was being patronizing. Its difficult to explain something you are so familar with to those who aren't accustomed to the lingo and workings of that said field.

Like you said not everyone is from a scientific background. People do demonstrate a lack of understanding of science as a result of this. I have a scientific background therefore understand how credible theory or hypothesis' can be even though to an outsider the words 'may suggest' or 'could be' etc might imply an uncertainty about scientific findings. That is the style scientific information must be reported. Nothing is certain.

people get so hung up on finding 'facts' sometimes it can be frustrating to a scientist, who knows first hand that this is not something easily achieved or demonstrated. This does not mean their findings should be disregarded.

I feel like Im rambling now but I thought id try and explain.

 

[blutea]

In fact, lol... I think the risk sheets for the vaccines should also list the risks of getting the disease and give the statistics for both. I think that would be very useful information.

It would be fantastic if they listed the risks of disease because then people could make an informed decision. In my humble opinion, more people would probably choose not to vaccinate if they knew the true disease statics against the true adverse reactions rates of vaccines.

Does it not occur to you that the disease prevelance is so low because most people vaccinate?

Are you kidding me!? Do you really think that vaccines are the only reason? As I have stated time and time again: Without better health, sanitation, living conditions, better nutrition...vaccines would not have an effect. They are only one piece of million piece puzzle.

 

[Blah11]

You want them to make up a risk factor? I fail to see how that would do any good but hey ho.

 

[lisaf]

If they say that something like whooping cough is rare... then a child gets it because most parents chose not to vaccinate that year as a result.... they would get sued.
What they CAN do is list the possible complications and survival statistics IF the child were to get the disease... then list the possible complications and statistics of having a complication for the vaccine.

Some diseases have a death rate of 1:1000 ... yes it may be rare to get the disease in the first place (due to vaccination) but when it is contracted, thats a very high death rate and I think parents should know that. If 10:1000 children with the disease are left with brain damage and 40:1000 are left with some serious debilitating injury from the disease... it kind of makes the 1:100,000 chance of having a reaction from the vaccine seem like not such a scary thing.

 

[Blue_bumpkin]

In fact, lol... I think the risk sheets for the vaccines should also list the risks of getting the disease and give the statistics for both. I think that would be very useful information.

It would be fantastic if they listed the risks of disease because then people could make an informed decision. In my humble opinion, more people would probably choose not to vaccinate if they knew the true disease statics against the true adverse reactions rates of vaccines.

Does it not occur to you that the disease prevelance is so low because most people vaccinate?

In the words of meat loaf: you took the words right out of my mouth

 

[lisaf]

In fact, lol... I think the risk sheets for the vaccines should also list the risks of getting the disease and give the statistics for both. I think that would be very useful information.

It would be fantastic if they listed the risks of disease because then people could make an informed decision. In my humble opinion, more people would probably choose not to vaccinate if they knew the true disease statics against the true adverse reactions rates of vaccines.

Does it not occur to you that the disease prevelance is so low because most people vaccinate?

Are you kidding me!? Do you really think that vaccines are the only reason? As if have stated time and time again: Without better health, sanitation, living conditions, better nutrition...vaccines would not have an effect. They are only one piece of million piece puzzle.

Then explain why vaccines are so effective in 3rd world countries where they don't have the healthcare and sanitation!

 

[Blah11]

In fact, lol... I think the risk sheets for the vaccines should also list the risks of getting the disease and give the statistics for both. I think that would be very useful information.

It would be fantastic if they listed the risks of disease because then people could make an informed decision. In my humble opinion, more people would probably choose not to vaccinate if they knew the true disease statics against the true adverse reactions rates of vaccines.

Does it not occur to you that the disease prevelance is so low because most people vaccinate?

Are you kidding me!? do you really think that vaccines are the only reason? As if have stated time and time again: Without better health, sanitation, living conditions, better nutrition...vaccines would not have an effect. They are only one piece of million piece puzzle.

What about meningitis C? Thats a relatively new vaccine and has been extremely successful. Also 3rd world countrys are vaccinated against some diseases and it helps and obviously they live in very poor conditions.