I am stupid, selfish, crazy and do not understand SCIENCE - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 173 Old 07-11-2011, 01:20 PM
 
SilverMoon010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 729
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I agree with you and can surely see that happening with some people but those people who easily reject the idea by a few sites here and there are truly not into researching to begin with.   If one or two sites posted from other not vaxers are going to turn them off for good then they probably didn't have any intention on digging much further anyway.  Research entails researching a lot of different paths/avenues, not just being influenced by what others post. Believe me, I have seen my share of strange nonvaxing sites but you choose to ignore them and continue searching if you are unsure of the data.  Isn't that what research is? Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and whether other people find it odd or strange it is still that person's right.  It doesn't mean their beliefs are "how it truly is."  It's just how that person sees it. We are all individuals and shouldn't be lumped into one category of "antivaxers," thus if someone posts an off-the-wall website, it doesn't mean all people use that source for their info. Isn't this like elementary school 101, learning every one is an individual?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chaoticzenmom View Post

It's not because of what people on forums are saying, it's because of following the links that some people provide as evidence supporting thier beliefs.  When I post links, I really try to keep that in mind.  Is the news from a reputable source? What other positions does this website support?  A person who is new to the idea of not vaccinating, who follows a link to these sites will likely think that all or most people who reject vaccines use these sites as thier source of education about vaccines.  That alone is enough for some people to reject the idea. 



 


Loving WAHM to my two little handsome DS's, '08 and '12, and loving wife to DH, '07love.gif

SilverMoon010 is offline  
#62 of 173 Old 07-11-2011, 04:40 PM - Thread Starter
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I agree with much of what is said above.  

 

No one should rule out an idea (vaxxing or not vaxxing, for example) because of zealous outliers on either side.  I do tend to think that being turned off by zealousness is a bit silly.  I wonder if people who said they were turned off by such sites were ever really interested in exploring non-vaxxing in the first place. 

 

That being said, I usually do try to quote stats from mainstream sites if I am sharing research on  vaccination -it is much harder to discredit.  mischievous.gif

 

 

NattyH likes this.
purslaine is offline  
#63 of 173 Old 07-11-2011, 04:51 PM
 
Lovemy3girls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: the rabbit hole
Posts: 96
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

chaoticzenmom,

 

I assume you are referring to me and my post about the MMR? May I ask why you chose to talk about it/me here instead of replying directly to that post? It almost gives the impression that you prefer to talk about people behind their back and not to their face (post). In my defense, let me say I am not an AIDS denialist or an extremist. You obviously feel that some of the material on that site is questionable and that's fine. Do I agree with everything said on the site? Not necessarily. It was really my intention to share information about vaccine contamination, which DOES in fact exist and is more widespread than people realize. Is this view extremist? Maybe that depends on your level of consciousness. On this I am definitely NOT a denialist however. I recently posted information about this important issue with a link to the Institute of Science in Society:

 

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Viruses_and_Virus_Nucleic_Acid_Contaminate_Vaccines.php     lllk                            al  

 

Can I safely assume that you won't be offended by that link? Or this one? http://www.i-sis.org.uk/unravelingAIDS.php ll  

 

"The thing that I like least about being a non-vaccinator is being associated with certain ideals that I don't hold that are often held by non-vaccinators."

  I ask you this: what about vaccine contamination is "horrible, conspiracy filled, and sensationalized"?  I'm sorry, but who is in denial here?    

 

I presented information I felt was relevant to the contamination problem with vaccines. People are free to pick and choose what they want when weighing their considerations. If something doesn't sit well with you, you move on, or you put it aside to possibly reconsider at a later time. I'm sure the women who come to this site are perfectly capable of using their fine minds to decide that for themselves.  

 

"Those websites I visited yesterday were just plain frightening." I'm not trying to scare anybody, I'm just trying to raise awareness about vaccine contamination. I'm sorry if the truth is frightening to some people, it sure can be when you're new to the vaccine issue. But isn't it better to know the truth than be ignorant of it?


Knowledge is power.

But only as powerful as the mind which grasps it, reading.gif the heart which believes in it, heartbeat.gif and the hands which wield it.goodvibes.gif

Lovemy3girls is offline  
#64 of 173 Old 07-11-2011, 05:02 PM - Thread Starter
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by peainthepod View Post



 

I try to give other people the benefit of the doubt in this area. I'm sure there are parents who don't research and just make a gut decision not to vaccinate, and I'm sure there are parents who don't research and make the popular or advised decision to vaccinate, but I try not to assume that of anyone because I don't want to resort to the sort of "You're too dumb to understand the real science or you'd do what we do!" tactic that is so commonly used against vaccine-free families.

 

 


Yeah this.

 

I do not assume people who vax are sheeple,  I ask that they do not assume I am stupid.  It is a statement that is usually  (but not always - see first post, lol) received positively.

 

purslaine is offline  
#65 of 173 Old 07-11-2011, 05:19 PM - Thread Starter
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by chaoticzenmom View Post

 The thing that I like least about being a non-vaccinator is being associated with certain ideals that I don't hold that are often held by non-vaccinators. 

 


I wonder if you are buying into the role we have been cast as? The vax/non vax discussion can get very heated and we are often cast as crackpots, for lack of a better word.

 

IRL I know several non-vaxxers and selective vaxxers - none are crackpots.  

 

I genuinely think most non-vaxxers have researched the issue, have kids with health issues or believe in a more wholistic health model.  The fringier sites get hits due to them being controversial - not due to them being treated as an anti-vaxxing bible.

 

I also do have to echo what someone said upthread - some sites have useful info or info that points you in an interesting direction.....even if the rest of their site is nonsense.

 

 

purslaine is offline  
#66 of 173 Old 07-11-2011, 05:36 PM
 
SilverMoon010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 729
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Chaoticzenmom:

 

Out of curiousity, what ideals are you referring to that are held (stereotypically of course) by nonvaccinators that you don't want to be associated with?

 

I honestly could care less what others think of nonvaxers. I don't go onto mainstream sites so I really don't know what they are calling nonvaxers.  They can call me a crackpot, crazy loon, stupid, whatever. I don't care because I know the truth and the truth is that I am an informed individual who has a college degree and who has educated myself on the issue at hand.  Why give anyone the power to judge you like that and make you dislike parts of your decision/status of being a nonvaxer?  


Loving WAHM to my two little handsome DS's, '08 and '12, and loving wife to DH, '07love.gif

SilverMoon010 is offline  
#67 of 173 Old 07-11-2011, 06:18 PM
 
chaoticzenmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,957
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lovemy3girls View Post

chaoticzenmom,

 

I assume you are referring to me and my post about the MMR? May I ask why you chose to talk about it/me here instead of replying directly to that post? It almost gives the impression that you prefer to talk about people behind their back and not to their face (post). In my defense, let me say I am not an AIDS denialist or an extremist. You obviously feel that some of the material on that site is questionable and that's fine. Do I agree with everything said on the site? Not necessarily. It was really my intention to share information about vaccine contamination, which DOES in fact exist and is more widespread than people realize. Is this view extremist? Maybe that depends on your level of consciousness. On this I am definitely NOT a denialist however. I recently posted information about this important issue with a link to the Institute of Science in Society:

 

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Viruses_and_Virus_Nucleic_Acid_Contaminate_Vaccines.php     lllk                            al  

 

Can I safely assume that you won't be offended by that link? Or this one? http://www.i-sis.org.uk/unravelingAIDS.php ll  

 

"The thing that I like least about being a non-vaccinator is being associated with certain ideals that I don't hold that are often held by non-vaccinators."

  I ask you this: what about vaccine contamination is "horrible, conspiracy filled, and sensationalized"?  I'm sorry, but who is in denial here?    

 

I presented information I felt was relevant to the contamination problem with vaccines. People are free to pick and choose what they want when weighing their considerations. If something doesn't sit well with you, you move on, or you put it aside to possibly reconsider at a later time. I'm sure the women who come to this site are perfectly capable of using their fine minds to decide that for themselves.  

 

"Those websites I visited yesterday were just plain frightening." I'm not trying to scare anybody, I'm just trying to raise awareness about vaccine contamination. I'm sorry if the truth is frightening to some people, it sure can be when you're new to the vaccine issue. But isn't it better to know the truth than be ignorant of it?


Actually, it was the site that you posted, although I didn't remember that it was you who posted it.  I was attempting to be vague enough not to be offensive to anyone who likes those sites, which would include you. Everyone has their preferences.  I didn't respond on that thread because I didn't feel that I could contribute in a positive way to those links because I was so shocked by that site and what I read there.  I don't even remember which thread contained the links that you posted.  I posted here in defense of someone else who mentioned being put off by sensationalized sites and those links you posted came to mind instantly, as well as a few other sites that I've found through links here and elsewhere. I didn't post here to talk about someone behind their back. You don't have to convince me of anything about vaccines, I've done a lot of reading on sites that I do trust. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post




I wonder if you are buying into the role we have been cast as? The vax/non vax discussion can get very heated and we are often cast as crackpots, for lack of a better word.

 

IRL I know several non-vaxxers and selective vaxxers - none are crackpots.  

 

I genuinely think most non-vaxxers have researched the issue, have kids with health issues or believe in a more wholistic health model.  The fringier sites get hits due to them being controversial - not due to them being treated as an anti-vaxxing bible.

 

I also do have to echo what someone said upthread - some sites have useful info or info that points you in an interesting direction.....even if the rest of their site is nonsense.

 

 


I don't think I'm a crackpot and haven't bought into a role.  I'm defending Uptosomegood on this thread because I felt that she was needing of someone to post who understood what she was trying to say.
When sites do have useful information, how are you supposed to trust it, or reference it when there is so much on the site that is "nonsense."

 


Quote:

Originally Posted by SilverMoon010 View Post

Chaoticzenmom:

 

Out of curiousity, what ideals are you referring to that are held (stereotypically of course) by nonvaccinators that you don't want to be associated with?

 

I honestly could care less what others think of nonvaxers. I don't go onto mainstream sites so I really don't know what they are calling nonvaxers.  They can call me a crackpot, crazy loon, stupid, whatever. I don't care because I know the truth and the truth is that I am an informed individual who has a college degree and who has educated myself on the issue at hand.  Why give anyone the power to judge you like that and make you dislike parts of your decision/status of being a nonvaxer?  



I'm not calling you anything and I don't think those things about you.  I find some websites to be very offensive.  I'm secular, if that helps you understand which sites may be offensive to me.  Other sites I may not find offensive, but just too sensationalized to use them as a source of information. 

 


Our children make a study of us in a way no one else ever will.  If we don't act according to our values, they will know.~Starhawk Rainbow.gif  New  User Agreement! http://www.mothering.com/community/wiki/user-agreement

chaoticzenmom is offline  
#68 of 173 Old 07-11-2011, 06:29 PM
 
amnesiac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: at the end of the longest line
Posts: 4,984
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
There are some pretty cool threads in the archives from several years ago about how we all evaluate information/resources/websites etc. so very differently.
amnesiac is offline  
#69 of 173 Old 07-11-2011, 06:30 PM
 
pers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 504
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lovemy3girls View Post

"Those websites I visited yesterday were just plain frightening." I'm not trying to scare anybody, I'm just trying to raise awareness about vaccine contamination. I'm sorry if the truth is frightening to some people, it sure can be when you're new to the vaccine issue. But isn't it better to know the truth than be ignorant of it?



Just looked back to see what website it was.. and I have to say, it's frightening to me too. 

 

How many hundreds of thousands died in South Africa because AIDS denialists caught the ear of Thabo Mbeki?  

 

Polio should be gone by now - it has been eliminated from most countries, and we were very close to having eradicated it from the entire world.  How many suffered and even died because of setbacks in vaccinating the populations of certain areas due to ugly rumors that the vaccine was being used to cause infertility or, as mentioned on that site, caused AIDS.  

 

So yes, a lot of that site is frightening, but none of it is the truth. 

 

I'm curious - why do you think that particular site is worthy of trust and a reliable source to send people to for information?  

 

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverMoon010 View Post

Chaoticzenmom:

 

Out of curiousity, what ideals are you referring to that are held (stereotypically of course) by nonvaccinators that you don't want to be associated with?

 

I honestly could care less what others think of nonvaxers. I don't go onto mainstream sites so I really don't know what they are calling nonvaxers.  They can call me a crackpot, crazy loon, stupid, whatever. I don't care because I know the truth and the truth is that I am an informed individual who has a college degree and who has educated myself on the issue at hand.  Why give anyone the power to judge you like that and make you dislike parts of your decision/status of being a nonvaxer?  


I'm not who you were asking.  And I don't think non-vaxers do typically hold these beliefs/ideals..

 

But for me, it was absolutely horrifying how often people claimed to be well educated about vaccines would pop out a link to a certain site with the name of a marine mammal in the URL as evidence to back up what they are saying.  This forum even used to list the vaccine section as a resource for information in a stickied post, though I think someone must have finally pointed out just how horrid a site it was as I'm pretty sure links to it are no longer allowed.  

 

I'm assuming most people who linked to it just liked what the page said and it sounded well reasoned and cited scientific sounding research, so they bookmarked it and pulled it out without ever really digging deeper or even looking around the site to see just what sort of place it was, and so never found all the rabid anti-semitism and other racist bits, or the cospiracy theories about how the Government was behind everything from the Columbine shootings to 9-11 to using vaccines to implant mind control devices and putting radio transmitters in dental fillings.   Not to mention crackpot ideas about alien lizards posing as humans and taking over the world... 

 

But some people obviously do believe that sort of stuff.  And when it's some faceless person posting on the internet, or even someone from real life who you don't know very well, you have to wonder, are they just ignorant of what sort of site it is?  Or maybe, for some reason, linking to the vaccine parts because they like them and for some reason trust the website to prevent factual information without twisting it in regards to vaccines and disregarding the rest?  Or are they one of those people who actually agrees with the rest of the site too?  

 

I'm sure most people fall into the first two categories, and members of the third are a rarity.  But still, when someone links to that site (or others, that while not quite so crazy, are insanely unreliable) colors my opinion on just how educated they are and their research abilities. 

pers is online now  
#70 of 173 Old 07-11-2011, 06:31 PM
 
Bokonon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,975
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by chaoticzenmom View Post



When sites do have useful information, how are you supposed to trust it, or reference it when there is so much on the site that is "nonsense."

 

 

 


LOL - to be honest, couldn't the same be said about MDC, especially in light of its recent Naomi Aldort and Pat Robertson debacles?  There is a lot that could be considered "nonsense" on this site, including consuming placenta, which is not "evidence based", though the practice is spoken of like a panacea by some.

 


A, jammin.gif mama to a boy (2005) and a girl (2009)
Bokonon is offline  
#71 of 173 Old 07-11-2011, 07:45 PM - Thread Starter
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by chaoticzenmom View Post



 

 


I don't think I'm a crackpot and haven't bought into a role.  I'm defending Uptosomegood on this thread because I felt that she was needing of someone to post who understood what she was trying to say.
When sites do have useful information, how are you supposed to trust it, or reference it when there is so much on the site that is "nonsense."

 

 

 

I doubt you are a crackpot.  I am glad you have not bought into that role of crackpot - but I do wonder if you think non-vaxxers in general are cast in that role?  Do you think extreme sites have a role to play - and how do you reconcile that one mans crazy is another mans acceptable?  Also - how does censorship play into this?  The bottom line is people have the right to post what they want - some may find it useful.     It is our job as readers to filter out things that seem too extreme to us.  Thankfully, the vast majority of the non-vax case is not fuelled by fringe sites.  They are background noise and entertainment.  

 

As per trusting fringe sites - I don't.  I don't actually trust very many sites.  If a fringe site or a mainstream site said something I thought was interesting I would double and perhaps triple check it with other sites (from mainstream to fringe ones).  

 


 

 

purslaine is offline  
#72 of 173 Old 07-11-2011, 07:56 PM - Thread Starter
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by pers View Post


 

I'm sure most people fall into the first two categories, and members of the third are a rarity.  But still, when someone links to that site (or others, that while not quite so crazy, are insanely unreliable) colors my opinion on just how educated they are and their research abilities. 


There are lots of reasons people link to sites that you may find crazy or unreliable.  To make the jump from "links to a fringe site"  (particularly if it is only done once or in a certain context)  to uneducated and lacking research abilities seems quite the jump to me...similar to calling people the S word...stupid. greensad.gif.  

 

In addition to the above, I thought the comments on Polio better suited to the main vaccine forum.  

 

purslaine is offline  
#73 of 173 Old 07-11-2011, 08:43 PM
 
chaoticzenmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,957
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post




There are lots of reasons people link to sites that you may find crazy or unreliable.  To make the jump from "posts to a crazy site"  (particularly if it is only done once or in a certain context)  to uneducated and lacking research abilities seems quite the jump to me...and maybe I am still a little raw, but similar to calling people the S word...stupid. greensad.gif

 

I think you should respect the fact that this is the subforum of non-vaxxers.  In addition to the above, I thought the comments on Polio better suited to the main vaccine forum.  

 



This is the I'm not vaccinating forum and nobody here has suggested vaccinating.  I once mentioned one of these sites in a thread by name and the responses were so threatening that I immediately pulled my blog, location and advertising from my MDC profile.  So, I'm not the one to ask about the value of these sites.  I normally find myself agreeing with you on subjects, so I'm wondering if you are thinking of completely different sites than I am.  I won't discuss it online, as I've mentioned that I don't think it's safe to do so and I don't particularly enjoy being threatened.

 


Our children make a study of us in a way no one else ever will.  If we don't act according to our values, they will know.~Starhawk Rainbow.gif  New  User Agreement! http://www.mothering.com/community/wiki/user-agreement

chaoticzenmom is offline  
#74 of 173 Old 07-11-2011, 08:50 PM
 
chaoticzenmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,957
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokonon View Post




LOL - to be honest, couldn't the same be said about MDC, especially in light of its recent Naomi Aldort and Pat Robertson debacles?  There is a lot that could be considered "nonsense" on this site, including consuming placenta, which is not "evidence based", though the practice is spoken of like a panacea by some.

 



LOL, I did think of NA when I wrote that, but in general, I think that MDC likes to give all people a place.  I may not practice everything, but I enjoy reading about other people's experiences.  I don't think of MDC as being too "out there", but I know that some do. There are a few friends of mine that I probably wouldn't send here.


Our children make a study of us in a way no one else ever will.  If we don't act according to our values, they will know.~Starhawk Rainbow.gif  New  User Agreement! http://www.mothering.com/community/wiki/user-agreement

chaoticzenmom is offline  
#75 of 173 Old 07-11-2011, 10:23 PM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 1,926
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)

Pers--I have some non-crackpot sites about 9-11 if you are interested.

SilverMoon010 and Bokonon like this.

 
 
 "Medical propaganda ops are, in the long run, the most dangerous. They appear to be neutral. They wave no political banners. They claim to be science. For these reasons, they can accomplish the goals of overt fascism without arousing suspicion.” — Jon Rappoport
 
 
 
beckybird is online now  
#76 of 173 Old 07-12-2011, 04:48 AM
 
emmy526's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)

Back in the 80's when i started my research, i had to use the library as there was no internet.  I had the librarian order me books to read on the subject, and there weren't so many back then...certainly not the fear-mongering tactics i see being used today in all the media.  

emmy526 is offline  
#77 of 173 Old 07-12-2011, 06:16 AM - Thread Starter
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by pers View Post





 

 

Polio should be gone by now - it has been eliminated from most countries, and we were very close to having eradicated it from the entire world.  How many suffered and even died because of setbacks in vaccinating the populations of certain areas due to ugly rumors that the vaccine was being used to cause infertility or, as mentioned on that site, caused AIDS.  

 

 

 

 



 


 



Quote:
Originally Posted by chaoticzenmom View Post





This is the I'm not vaccinating forum and nobody here has suggested vaccinating. 

 

 


The above was what I thought was out of place in the non-vaxxing forum.  It comes quite close to saying people should vax for Polio.  If your interpretation of it is different, that is fine.

 

 

 

 

 

purslaine is offline  
#78 of 173 Old 07-12-2011, 06:42 AM - Thread Starter
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

I was on a more mainstream board, and dared to admit I do not vax.  I was pretty much bombarded with demands that I tell them why I do not vax and present research.  I did tell them my reason  (alert!  This gave them all sorts of fodder) but refused to get into presenting research papers and such.  I was pretty dang sure by this point any research I presented would have been met with scorn.  

 

 

 

I highlighted my OP (oh, the narcissism) but I wanted to bring this conversation around slightly.

 

I was called all sorts of names and harassed and I did not post any fringe sites.  

 

The insertion of discussing fringe (often crazy) sites posted by non-vaxxers is interesting.   I sincerely hope no lurkers are using that as a justification for berating non-vaxxers as that is so lame.  There are fringe sites in almost any discipline - to judge non-vaxxers as a whole by fringe sites is wrong.  

 

 

 


 

 

purslaine is offline  
#79 of 173 Old 07-12-2011, 07:16 AM
 
SilverMoon010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 729
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

kathymuggle:

 

Not sure if you are referring to me because I know I'm not the only one guilty of it on here but I have surely referred to certain groups of people as sheeple and I'm not ashamed to admit it.  To me, the sheeple are those who don't question authority whatsoever, do as they are told, don't research a damn thing themselves, and look at government groups as if they have everyone's best interest at heart, with no other interests/motives involved.  Like I said, when I say sheeple, I am not referring to those on this site and the people on this site most likely have done their research and came to a decision they feel comfortable with.  Sheeple to me are those who can't think for themselves, like a herd of sheep but actual people.  I have seen comments from "pro-vaxing" (I don't particularly like the pro-vaxing and anti-vaxing terms but will use them here to make a point) people in response to Yahoo articles, etc, where the article is referring to the measles epidemic or what have you and how the "provaxers" insist it's all the fault of the nonvaxers, etc.   Well, a lot of these comments from the provaxers that I have seen in regards to mainstream articles such as those are so uneducated, ignorant, and have no facts behind them. I don't even think these people have a clue about vaccines. Those types of comments are from people I call sheeple.


Loving WAHM to my two little handsome DS's, '08 and '12, and loving wife to DH, '07love.gif

SilverMoon010 is offline  
#80 of 173 Old 07-12-2011, 08:25 AM
 
chaoticzenmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,957
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by emmy526 View Post

Back in the 80's when i started my research, i had to use the library as there was no internet.  I had the librarian order me books to read on the subject, and there weren't so many back then...certainly not the fear-mongering tactics i see being used today in all the media.  



Oh interesting!  I'm curious how many vaccines back then there were to research and what information was available back then. 

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post





 




The above was what I thought was out of place in the non-vaxxing forum.  It comes quite close to saying people should vax for Polio.  If your interpretation of it is different, that is fine.

 

 

 

 

 



My interpretation was that people in Africa, who are dealing with HIV and Polio don't need someone telling them that those diseases aren't real or that the treatments for the diseases will kill or maim them.  I didn't even apply it, in my head, to here.  I read other posts by Pers that lead me to believe that she doesn't vaccinate, or is at least selective (read a few posts up). 



Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post



I highlighted my OP (oh, the narcissism) but I wanted to bring this conversation around slightly.

 

I was called all sorts of names and harassed and I did not post any fringe sites.  

 

The insertion of discussing fringe (often crazy) sites posted by non-vaxxers is interesting.   I sincerely hope no lurkers are using that as a justification for berating non-vaxxers as that is so lame.  There are fringe sites in almost any discipline - to judge non-vaxxers as a whole by fringe sites is wrong.  

 

 

 


 

 



Right, which is why I feel compelled to state that I do not support fringe sites.  I'm not talking about Mercola or Natural news which often take valid information and hype it up.  To me, that lessons their credibility, but they can still be useful. Pers summed up the other ones pretty well in the post where you felt she was advocating vaccination.


Our children make a study of us in a way no one else ever will.  If we don't act according to our values, they will know.~Starhawk Rainbow.gif  New  User Agreement! http://www.mothering.com/community/wiki/user-agreement

chaoticzenmom is offline  
#81 of 173 Old 07-12-2011, 09:00 AM
 
SilverMoon010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 729
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by chaoticzenmom View Post

Oh interesting!  I'm curious how many vaccines back then there were to research and what information was available back then. 

 

 

In the late 70s/early 80s, there was only the MMR, DPT, and polio vaccine. From the mid-80s on is when they started adding more and more starting with HIB, hep B, etc. I'm also curious as to what info was available back then as well. It would be interesting to see.  I do have the book by Robert Mendelsohn, M.D., copywritten in 1984 regarding the dangers of mass vaccination, etc., so there was certainly information circulating at that time as to the negative effects vaccines can have. I was only 7 though so I can't tell ya what else was out there at that timewinky.gif


Loving WAHM to my two little handsome DS's, '08 and '12, and loving wife to DH, '07love.gif

SilverMoon010 is offline  
#82 of 173 Old 07-12-2011, 09:07 AM - Thread Starter
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverMoon010 View Post

kathymuggle:

 

Not sure if you are referring to me because I know I'm not the only one guilty of it on here but I have surely referred to certain groups of people as sheeple and I'm not ashamed to admit it. 


Oh, no....I have heard the word sheeple many times and from different people.  I was not singling anyone out.

 

I also edited (before you posted) because I made a point or two I am not certain on - the sheeple comment was part of it and is gone.

 

purslaine is offline  
#83 of 173 Old 07-12-2011, 09:32 AM - Thread Starter
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

nm 

 

 

 

purslaine is offline  
#84 of 173 Old 07-12-2011, 09:37 AM
 
emmy526's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverMoon010 View Post

kathymuggle:

 

Not sure if you are referring to me because I know I'm not the only one guilty of it on here but I have surely referred to certain groups of people as sheeple and I'm not ashamed to admit it.  To me, the sheeple are those who don't question authority whatsoever, do as they are told, don't research a damn thing themselves, and look at government groups as if they have everyone's best interest at heart, with no other interests/motives involved.  Like I said, when I say sheeple, I am not referring to those on this site and the people on this site most likely have done their research and came to a decision they feel comfortable with.  Sheeple to me are those who can't think for themselves, like a herd of sheep but actual people.  I have seen comments from "pro-vaxing" (I don't particularly like the pro-vaxing and anti-vaxing terms but will use them here to make a point) people in response to Yahoo articles, etc, where the article is referring to the measles epidemic or what have you and how the "provaxers" insist it's all the fault of the nonvaxers, etc.   Well, a lot of these comments from the provaxers that I have seen in regards to mainstream articles such as those are so uneducated, ignorant, and have no facts behind them. I don't even think these people have a clue about vaccines. Those types of comments are from people I call sheeple.


i agree...and i know plenty of them and its just mind boggling how they can be presented valid information, and then disregard it--even the cdc warnings rite on the vax inserts..."well i trust the dr" is always the answer.  then they will go on to say how they don't understand what the dr is doing, but they "better follow his advice."..another one, "Gee, my baby screamed for three days everytime after her vaxes, wouldn't eat, had diahrrea, but the dr sed its not related."...and they believe it..i do stop to wonder about the health of todays children in the next 15yrs...what are we going to see?  

 

emmy526 is offline  
#85 of 173 Old 07-12-2011, 09:49 AM
 
chaoticzenmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,957
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

nm 

 

 

 



I read what you said and didn't find it offensive.  We did just interpret it differently. 

 


Our children make a study of us in a way no one else ever will.  If we don't act according to our values, they will know.~Starhawk Rainbow.gif  New  User Agreement! http://www.mothering.com/community/wiki/user-agreement

chaoticzenmom is offline  
#86 of 173 Old 07-12-2011, 10:16 AM - Thread Starter
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by emmy526 View Post




i agree...and i know plenty of them and its just mind boggling how they can be presented valid information, and then disregard it--even the cdc warnings rite on the vax inserts..."well i trust the dr" is always the answer.  then they will go on to say how they don't understand what the dr is doing, but they "better follow his advice."..another one, "Gee, my baby screamed for three days everytime after her vaxes, wouldn't eat, had diahrrea, but the dr sed its not related."...and they believe it..i do stop to wonder about the health of todays children in the next 15yrs...what are we going to see?  

 


Here is the thing:

 

Sheeple is a divisive word.  I also do not think it is particularly true of any of the vaccination forums on MDC.    Vaxxers hear "sheeple" and get all ragey.  I have been on MDC for a number of years and I have seen it happen.  It is one of those words that has the power to derail discussion.  

 

I think hearing sheeple to vaxxers is similar to hearing ("you do not understand science!" or "you are selfish for not vaxxing!") to non-vaxxers.  

 

Even if you do run across a person online or in reality who is a sheeple or genuinely does not understand science, I think you should keeps such judgments to yourself.  In addition to being judgey, I think it is harder to have a conversation once everyone is feeling defensive.

 

 

 

 

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by chaoticzenmom View Post





I read what you said and didn't find it offensive.  We did just interpret it differently. 

 


Agreed.  peace.gif

 

purslaine is offline  
#87 of 173 Old 07-12-2011, 11:10 AM
Banned
 
UpToSomeGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 61
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Wise words, kathymuggle.

UpToSomeGood is offline  
#88 of 173 Old 07-12-2011, 12:06 PM
 
Astrogirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 362
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

I agree with much of what is said above.  

 

No one should rule out an idea (vaxxing or not vaxxing, for example) because of zealous outliers on either side.  I do tend to think that being turned off by zealousness is a bit silly.  I wonder if people who said they were turned off by such sites were ever really interested in exploring non-vaxxing in the first place. 

 

That being said, I usually do try to quote stats from mainstream sites if I am sharing research on  vaccination -it is much harder to discredit.  mischievous.gif

 

 



Respectfully, its more like this:

 

- Mama1 is confused about vaxes and comes to MDC to get the lowdown.  

- She reads the Vax forum and gets a sense of whos vaxing (Mama3) and whos not (Mama2)and listens to their reasons why.  Mama2 lists possible references, and Mama3, say a sciencey kind of Mama, says 'those references are bogus, not peer reviewed and not substantiated within the medical community'

- Mama1 doesn't know who to believe.  Confusion further ensues.

- She then sees Mama2 spouting off about fluoride in water, colloidal silver, not taking sick kids to a doctor, etc and it all falls apart for her.  This need not be because she is ignorant, perhaps she has an advanced degree in water treatment and has a better understanding of additives to municipal water supplies. ;)    By reason of character assessment, she then sees that Mama2, is, for lack of a better term, something of a fanatic and frequently talks about things which she does not know.  The valuation of Mama2's arguments goes down.  

 

Any time someone rants and raves and uses extreme arguments that have no logical plausibility, the valuation of their arguments goes down, perhaps even to the point where its dismissed entirely.  Perhaps even to the point where it seems like the entire MOVEMENT could be dismissed, because if those are the best arguments they have, there's just something missing. 

 

 

Off topic and this isnt directed to you KathyMuggle, but whoever said in this thread that this is part of 'mommy wars' - please don't.  The discussion of vaccinations and serious childhood illnesses such as polio is far too important to sweep such a ten-cent and pedestrian phrase over.  I assure you, most people do not argue about this, esp not at MDC or the other board*, just to feel superior to other mama's.  We are not talking about minivans and barbie dolls here, this is a valid topic of discussion that both sides are extremely passionate about, not just using it as fodder for mockery and gloating.  

 

(*which i hate to break it to anyone, but its far from 'mainstream' - its actually fairly AP and natural compared to most boards)  

 

Kathy, I wish you well and I'm sorry if you were hurt. :(  

Ammaarah likes this.
Astrogirl is offline  
#89 of 173 Old 07-12-2011, 12:22 PM - Thread Starter
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Nice post Astro - but I wonder what you think we should do about the fact that people do post fringey sites here -- other than take personal responsibility to not post sites we find too scary/extreme?

purslaine is offline  
#90 of 173 Old 07-12-2011, 01:07 PM
 
Bokonon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,975
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Astrogirl View Post

Off topic and this isnt directed to you KathyMuggle, but whoever said in this thread that this is part of 'mommy wars' - please don't.  The discussion of vaccinations and serious childhood illnesses such as polio is far too important to sweep such a ten-cent and pedestrian phrase over.  I assure you, most people do not argue about this, esp not at MDC or the other board*, just to feel superior to other mama's.  We are not talking about minivans and barbie dolls here, this is a valid topic of discussion that both sides are extremely passionate about, not just using it as fodder for mockery and gloating.  



I don't consider the "mommy wars" to be about feeling superior, but more about feeling that one knows the precise "right" way of doing things.  Please don't tell me how to feel or what terminology to use when I see people calling non-vaxers "child abusers" all over the internet, or telling me that I deserve for my child to die of measles for not vaccinating her.  It IS vicious, and the most outspoken of vaccine advocates are often the most judgmental and closed-minded.

peainthepod and Marnica like this.

A, jammin.gif mama to a boy (2005) and a girl (2009)
Bokonon is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off