Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Actually, I think he's arguing the opposite of McCarthy's view. He's saying that it's harmful to not get the shot, etc.
I'll take your word for it, of course, but from my point of view it seemed very much like you were being sarcastic, not facetious; that you were sarcastically calling him Jenny McCarthy because his views were similar to hers (when they weren't). If someone espoused the view that, "The Earth is only 6000 years old!", I might sarcastically say "Yes, thank you Mr. Hovind...".
.Hmm, that would only exacerbate the (my) impression of sarcasm.
""
Depends on what you mean by useful. There are people that have the flu that do not even know they have the flu. They do not feel sick. If you take a placebo, your still have the flu. But you may no longer feel sick because of the placebo effect. They say it is not good to use antibiotics in this way because of antibiotic resistant bacteria.
This was a conversation I use to have with my dad about anesthesia. Or just having an operation in general. That was the figure he use to tell people that 3% died but at least 50 or 60% were helped and the rest it did no harm. Or even 97% were better because of the operation. So he felt it was ok to kill 3% of the people to help the people you are able to help with an operation. In the end he died from an operation. Live by the sword, then you die by the sword. There were things they could have done to reduce the risk. IT was all rather a botched job from someone that did not have a lot of experience. Something I had warned him about many times. Just like I am here warning people.
I asked for peer-reviewed research, not a news article. It would be trivial to find a news article that supports mass vaccination, and then where would we be?
Err... which is it? The botched job, or the inherent 3% risk? I strongly doubt that 3% figure, seeing as the actual risk of death from anaesthesia is entirely dependant on what anaesthetic you take and under what conditions (LA/GA, duration you're 'under', where and how the drug is administered (gas, IV...), etc). And, even if there were a flat mortality risk across the whole width and breadth of anaesthesia, 3% is gargantuanly high.
It says pretty much exactly what I said above: "With influenza vaccines, there is a real issue about who to vaccinate and who benefits. For a long time, the focus was on vaccinating the elderly, since they're the ones who are likely to die of flu, even though flu vaccines are quite ineffective in that population. From a public health perspective, the right population to vaccinate is small children, since they're the ones who spread the virus the most."
In his case it was just a botched job. The guy was young and inexperienced. That is why a little bit could have gone a long way. I do not know why they did not wait for my brother to get there before they did anything. Because he would have straightened it all out.
If someone came up with a T - H - E - O - R - Y
No, the reasons are usually politcal. For instance, nobody really cares what creationists believe, any more than we care that Seventh Day Adventists don't eat meat or that Mormons wear special underclothing. But creationists want their doctrine taught in public schools, along with their sectarian form of prayer and Bible study. So, they get some pushback.
