I'm not anti-vax, I'm pro-research! - Page 4 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#91 of 261 Old 03-02-2013, 07:42 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeckyBird View Post


It's also inflammatory to call people "conspiracy theorists" if they are skeptical. That term also comes up a lot around here.

So two wrongs make a right? I agree calling someone a conspiracy theorist is just pushing buttons and trying to get their goat. And when someone does that they are rightly jumped on for it.

Fruitful mama, yes, it goes both ways. It's an inflammatory statement regardless if who says it. I admit I missed it used the first time until I went back and looked, though. It's just a way to dismiss someone's point without having to say anything substantive.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#92 of 261 Old 03-02-2013, 09:17 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

It's really inflammatory to call what someone has to say propaganda. 

Sorry, but it's not inflammatory at all.  From dictionary.reference.com:

 

 

prop·a·gan·da

  [prop-uh-gan-duh]  Show IPA
noun
1.
information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement,institution, nation, etc.
2.
the deliberate spreading of such information, rumors, etc.
3.
the particular doctrines or principles propagated by an organization or movement.
applejuice likes this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#93 of 261 Old 03-02-2013, 09:30 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post


So two wrongs make a right? I agree calling someone a conspiracy theorist is just pushing buttons and trying to get their goat. And when someone does that they are rightly jumped on for it.

 

 

 

Your post from 5/3/12:

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

It is a conspiracy theory, you can take it as pejorative if you want, but that's what it is. It's a theory that there is a conspiracy to conceal cases of vaccine preventable diseases by calling them something else. It's not worth responding to further, because the nature of conspiracy theories is that all evidence to the contrary is part of the conspiracy.
 

There were several more references to conspiracy theories in your posts, but you edited them as requested when they were flagged for violating MDC policy.

 

In this arena, calling someone's point a "conspiracy theory" is, for all practical purposes, the same as labeling someone as a conspiracy theorist; in other words, it's just pushing buttons and trying to get their goat.  Your own words, in fact.

applejuice and BeckyBird like this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#94 of 261 Old 03-03-2013, 12:33 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,793
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Wow Taximom- you're very good at searching old posts here (even ones you say are deleted).

Perhaps Rrrrrachels opinion has changed slightly in the last 6 months, or you're taking her quote out of context.

What was the point of this thread again?

Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is offline  
#95 of 261 Old 03-03-2013, 12:41 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,793
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by fruitfulmomma View Post

Does that go both ways Rachel? JN just used the same phrase to describe the anti-vax position.

There was a subtle difference. JN called what Jenny McCarthy spreads on Oprah (etc) anti vaccine propaganda. Mirzam said she hadn't read anything JN has posted which wasn't "vaccine industry spread propaganda".

Interesting word propaganda. Thanks for the dictionary definition Taximom. Whatever the definition though it brings to mind the spreading of deliberate misinformation or half truths by large well funded bodies in order to promote their agenda.

Applying that to opinions of MDC mothers posting on either side if this debate then does seem to me to be sailing quite close to the User agreement (in which we agree to respect each others well researched opinions).

Shall we move on?

Also - welcome to mothering JN. Join us on Mindful vaccination board if you want a break from the rigorous debate. smile.gif

Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is offline  
#96 of 261 Old 03-03-2013, 05:32 AM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post


Your post from 5/3/12:


There were several more references to conspiracy theories in your posts, but you edited them as requested when they were flagged for violating MDC policy.

In this arena, calling someone's point a "conspiracy theory" is, for all practical purposes, the same as labeling someone as a conspiracy theorist; in other words, it's just pushing buttons and trying to get their goat.  Your own words, in fact.

Calling someone a conspiracy theorist is NOT the same as calling a particular claim a conspiracy theory. One is an objective classification of a theory or belief, and another is a pejorative comment about a person.

Either way, I got jumped on for saying that, so it obviously was button pushing, intentional or not. In the interest of trying to get somewhere I've avoided saying it since.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#97 of 261 Old 03-03-2013, 06:06 AM
 
Dakotacakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Again though bringing it back to THIS post. where exactly is the research in this blog post? Ithe links to all the research the blog author has done are facebook, blog posts and a trade organization. Spending hours researchiing trade organizations, blogs, and facebook in my opinion is worse that making your decision doing no research at all.

I have done a lot of research on many decisions for parenting, from breasfeeding, to discipliine, to sleeping arangements, to diet. None of it involved blogs or facebook. NO I am not suggesting that everyone saying they have researched has done this, but that is the totality of the post in this thread "research" provided!

And honestly propoganda isn't just one sided. It seems that if you choose to vaccinate you are told you have "fallen for propoganda" Perhaps the trade organization, supplement salesmen, blog authors and facebook posters are also peddling propoganda to not vaccinate? Propoganda is essentially communication that is more for the person saying it or putting it out there than the consumer. If you are trying to get me to buy into your cause (or purchase your product whether that be a vaccine or a supplement)anything you are putting out is propoganda..
erigeron likes this.
Dakotacakes is offline  
#98 of 261 Old 03-03-2013, 06:19 AM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,505
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by fruitfulmomma View Post

Does that go both ways Rachel? JN just used the same phrase to describe the anti-vax position.

There was a subtle difference. JN called what Jenny McCarthy spreads on Oprah (etc) anti vaccine propaganda. Mirzam said she hadn't read anything JN has posted which wasn't "vaccine industry spread propaganda".

Interesting word propaganda. Thanks for the dictionary definition Taximom. Whatever the definition though it brings to mind the spreading of deliberate misinformation or half truths by large well funded bodies in order to promote their agenda.

Applying that to opinions of MDC mothers posting on either side if this debate then does seem to me to be sailing quite close to the User agreement (in which we agree to respect each others well researched opinions).

Shall we move on?

Also - welcome to mothering JN. Join us on Mindful vaccination board if you want a break from the rigorous debate. smile.gif

JNajla called Jenny McCarthy a lunatic which is a personal attack, which I believe is a UA violation even on this forum.

 

For those that want to make their own minds up whether it is propaganda or not here is Jenny McCarthy and JB Handley on the Doctors (it wasn't Oprah)

 

 

BeckyBird likes this.

Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is offline  
#99 of 261 Old 03-03-2013, 06:28 AM
 
JNajla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Posts: 620
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
But WHAT "research" does Jenny McCarthy cite that is credible? Whether YOU agree or not, she DID cause an unnecessary panic and it did cause a decline in vaccine rates and there were pockets of outbreaks occurring. I feel that she acted like a lunatic because she couldn't substantiate her claim, gave parents false hope, and provided false information in a VERY public forum. I've never met another healthcare professional who is in support of her "ideology". And it isn't because we're "paid or brainwashed" by "big pharma". It is because we practice medicine using evidenced based practice.

First time mama to baby Easton born on 6/21/13!

JNajla is offline  
#100 of 261 Old 03-03-2013, 06:50 AM
 
JNajla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Posts: 620
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
With evidence based practice (creating clinical practice guidelines using evidence), there is a hierarchy in which the evidence is categorized. Each type of evidence is given more "weight" than others. Here is an example: http://ebp.lib.uic.edu/nursing/node/12

This evidence, research, expert testimonials, etc is what practitioners utilize when making clinical judgments. Basically, we use what we know works, because it is based on evidence. As you can see, testimony is a less credible means of determining efficacy. Anecdotal data isn't even on here. (Jenny McCarthy's testimony). While anecdotal reports are what initially may bring us to formulate a hypothesis, her claims and any others like hers have have never PROVEN CAUSATION. Like I've said before, I keep reading about people who've "done their research", but no one has provided a scholarly, evidenced based study that has proven a direct link or causation between vaccines and autism. The efficacy of vaccines has been proven for decades, and that is irrefutable. I want to protect my children just as anyone else does, but I'm not taking a chance on going by unsubstantiated claims. However, if there is true scientific evidence that clearly indicates a positive causation of autism and vaccines, then I would withhold them. (I have yet to see this).
prosciencemum likes this.

First time mama to baby Easton born on 6/21/13!

JNajla is offline  
#101 of 261 Old 03-03-2013, 07:02 AM
 
fruitfulmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Between the Rockies and a Flat Place
Posts: 4,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)

Hmm.. she co-authored a book with a medical doctor. I suspect *he* supports at least some of her ideology. 

 

By what evidence based medicine did you determine that you knew that Evan had celiac disease that was mistakenly diagnosed as autism?

fruitfulmomma is offline  
#102 of 261 Old 03-03-2013, 10:39 AM
 
IdentityCrisisMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 10,770
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 110 Post(s)

There are some flags for this thread. We are aware of how important it is to everyone that we moderate with consistency, so we'll discuss the issue of public figure name calling and get back to everyone. What we can all agree on is that our points can be made without name calling of any kind. While we are working on this issue, please refrain from calling anyone names and avoid quoting in case of a request for edits. TY. 


Mama to DD September 2001 and DD April 2011 *Winner for most typos* eat.gif
IdentityCrisisMama is offline  
#103 of 261 Old 03-03-2013, 12:54 PM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,793
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Sadly it seems you can find an MD to support anything. Doesn't mean most (or even many) would agree.

PS. Jenny McCarthy has appeared both on Oprah and Larry King Live to talk about her child's autism.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenny_McCarthy

Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is offline  
#104 of 261 Old 03-03-2013, 03:12 PM
 
fruitfulmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Between the Rockies and a Flat Place
Posts: 4,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Quote:
Sadly it seems you can find an MD to support anything. Doesn't mean most (or even many) would agree.

 

History has had no lack of doctors who were consider rebels by their colleagues, who have been proven right in the end. Where would we be without the work of Dr. Semmelweis and his attempts to show them that their filthy habits of touching infected cadavers and then birthing women without so much as washing their hands was killing these women?

fruitfulmomma is offline  
#105 of 261 Old 03-03-2013, 03:16 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Also full of doctors who everyone thought were idiot whack jobs that ended up being . . . Idiot whack jobs.
prosciencemum likes this.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#106 of 261 Old 03-03-2013, 04:13 PM
 
littlest birds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: a dream-filled fixer-upper
Posts: 2,952
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Having been so disappointed so many times in the knowledge of doctors, the efficacy of prescribed medicines, and the protocols of medical institutions, the one thing I do know about humans is that we know a lot less about health in so many situations than we think we do. 

 

I think vaccines are just something for which we do not fully understand the complete effects on health.  I am not skeptical of their efficacy, which I observe is mixed but real.  If they can cause major damage occasionally, it's easy for me to see that it's likely there are cases of less extreme damage and if they do not present when or how we expect them we do not see them as provably connected.  This is likely to have a graphable curve if we ever are able to collect the data.  I think there are flaws in our ability to connect cause and effect.

 

There is a lot we don't know about vaccines, and a lot of exaggeration on both sides of the debate.  There are also real risks on both sides yet insufficient information to understand those risks fully along with institutions with a strong interest in influencing the public in one direction only.  I think either decision a parent ultimately makes is understandable. We have a blind spot about vaccines and in that blind spot there may be a great deal of risk or minor risks but it really is a "shot in the dark" for us all.  Some parents do not find the blind spot to be of significant concern but others have enough piecemeal information to understand a high risk potential in the areas of weak knowledge.  I fully respect others' decisions knowing that all of us are working with partial information and that some of the sources on both sides have less credibility than others. 

 

If a general distrust of the medical establishment or other institutions influences you, that is certainly understandable.  My own experiences have made me very distrustful, and I know that creates a bias, nevertheless my bias is based on real things and my skepticism legitimate.


ME&treehugger.gifHE... loving our: wild.gifdd(18) ~~violin.gifds(13) read.gifdd(13)~~ peace.gifdd(10)
 
 

littlest birds is offline  
#107 of 261 Old 03-03-2013, 07:49 PM
 
mama24-7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: with the dust bunnies
Posts: 2,457
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlest birds View Post

Having been so disappointed so many times in the knowledge of doctors, the efficacy of prescribed medicines, and the protocols of medical institutions, the one thing I do know about humans is that we know a lot less about health in so many situations than we think we do. 

 

I think vaccines are just something for which we do not fully understand the complete effects on health.  I am not skeptical of their efficacy, which I observe is mixed but real.  If they can cause major damage occasionally, it's easy for me to see that it's likely there are cases of less extreme damage and if they do not present when or how we expect them we do not see them as provably connected.  This is likely to have a graphable curve if we ever are able to collect the data.  I think there are flaws in our ability to connect cause and effect.

 

There is a lot we don't know about vaccines, and a lot of exaggeration on both sides of the debate.  There are also real risks on both sides yet insufficient information to understand those risks fully along with institutions with a strong interest in influencing the public in one direction only.  I think either decision a parent ultimately makes is understandable. We have a blind spot about vaccines and in that blind spot there may be a great deal of risk or minor risks but it really is a "shot in the dark" for us all.  Some parents do not find the blind spot to be of significant concern but others have enough piecemeal information to understand a high risk potential in the areas of weak knowledge.  I fully respect others' decisions knowing that all of us are working with partial information and that some of the sources on both sides have less credibility than others. 

 

If a general distrust of the medical establishment or other institutions influences you, that is certainly understandable.  My own experiences have made me very distrustful, and I know that creates a bias, nevertheless my bias is based on real things and my skepticism legitimate.

yeahthat.gif

 

The current state of my health & that of my children is the result of medical "science."  It was better for me to be born by surgery than vaginally because I was breech?  I doubt that.  It was better for me to be fed some concoction generated in a factory?  I know that's a lie.  It was better for me to receive massive amounts of antibiotics because I had many ear infections?  Doubtful.  Maybe eliminating dairy would have helped me, but my mother wasn't capable of thinking & I'm sure it didn't cross her mind that I had a problem w/ it as a baby, maybe I'd still have a problem w/ it.

 

Modern western medicine has caused us great harm; I didn't come from a heatlhy woman, my health was compromised again & again & I've passed my ill health onto my children.  My oldest was negatively effected by her vaccines.  I know my second child would be injured by them, likely autistic had he had any.  And my youngest, he'd probably be dead.  

 

I wish those that were so skeptical of those of us w/ children for whom vaccines just do not work nor are they worth the risk would direct some of that same level of scrutiny at the studies that come out and the recommednations being made by governments.  I hope that none of them have to learn the hard way, since it is the parents who will learn but the children who will really suffer from it.

 

Sus


Baby the babies while they're babies so they don't need babying for a lifetime.
mama24-7 is online now  
#108 of 261 Old 03-04-2013, 11:07 AM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by JNajla View Post

But WHAT "research" does Jenny McCarthy cite that is credible? Whether YOU agree or not, she DID cause an unnecessary panic and it did cause a decline in vaccine rates and there were pockets of outbreaks occurring. I feel that she acted like a lunatic because she couldn't substantiate her claim, gave parents false hope, and provided false information in a VERY public forum. I've never met another healthcare professional who is in support of her "ideology". And it isn't because we're "paid or brainwashed" by "big pharma". It is because we practice medicine using evidenced based practice.

Please provide evidence that vaccinations rates fell as a direct result of Jenny McCarthy and that these falling rates have contributed to outbreaks of disease and please be specific about what disease in particular. 

 

There are plenty of parents out there of children who have been diagnosed with autism that are having great success in improving their children's symptoms by following gluten free and casein free diets. (no Rrrrachel I cannot ballpark "plenty" for you winky.gif ) Please see Taxi's post addressing this. This does NOT mean that all of these children were simply misdiagnosed. The only difference between these parents and Jenny McCarthy is that JM is an actress and spoke publicly about her experiences with her son. So if she is a lunatic than you are basically calling all those other parents out there who are SUCCESSFULLY helping their children lunatisc too. or no maybe you are just calling them misguided or misinformed because all of their kids must have been misdiagnosed too. eyesroll.gif

Mirzam, applejuice and BeckyBird like this.

If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
#109 of 261 Old 03-04-2013, 11:09 AM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by JNajla View Post

With evidence based practice (creating clinical practice guidelines using evidence), there is a hierarchy in which the evidence is categorized. Each type of evidence is given more "weight" than others. Here is an example: http://ebp.lib.uic.edu/nursing/node/12

This evidence, research, expert testimonials, etc is what practitioners utilize when making clinical judgments. Basically, we use what we know works, because it is based on evidence. As you can see, testimony is a less credible means of determining efficacy. Anecdotal data isn't even on here. (Jenny McCarthy's testimony). While anecdotal reports are what initially may bring us to formulate a hypothesis, her claims and any others like hers have have never PROVEN CAUSATION. Like I've said before, I keep reading about people who've "done their research", but no one has provided a scholarly, evidenced based study that has proven a direct link or causation between vaccines and autism. The efficacy of vaccines has been proven for decades, and that is irrefutable. I want to protect my children just as anyone else does, but I'm not taking a chance on going by unsubstantiated claims. However, if there is true scientific evidence that clearly indicates a positive causation of autism and vaccines, then I would withhold them. (I have yet to see this).

ROTFLMAO.gif actually if this was irrefutable we wouldn't be here 

Mirzam likes this.

If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
#110 of 261 Old 03-04-2013, 11:26 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,793
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marnica View Post

ROTFLMAO.gif  actually if this was irrefutable we wouldn't be here 

Well the thing is it is. And I wonder why we're here constantly if I'm honest!

Going to become a favourite of mine I see: "The great thing about science is its true whether it not you believe it" (or agree with it).

Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is offline  
#111 of 261 Old 03-04-2013, 11:48 AM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,371
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 101 Post(s)
Quote:
"The great thing about science is its true whether it not you believe it"

 

 

a blanket remark like this comes off as empirical evidence at bestbiggrinbounce.gif


 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
#112 of 261 Old 03-04-2013, 11:53 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,793
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Well yes - the complicated bit is the figuring out what's the right science in the first place!

Very good agreement on the idea that vaccines have saved millions of lives since they were invented though. smile.gif

Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is offline  
#113 of 261 Old 03-04-2013, 11:54 AM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I don't think empirical evidence means what you think it means.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#114 of 261 Old 03-04-2013, 12:45 PM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,371
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 101 Post(s)
Quote:
I don't think empirical evidence means what you think it means.

 

don't worry, I'm well aware thank you 


 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
#115 of 261 Old 03-04-2013, 12:49 PM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,793
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Could you explain what you think it means then, because I'm totally lost. smile.gif

I think empirical evidence means evidence gathered by making measurements of something (e.g. Like measuring your height, or how fast your car is driving).

Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is offline  
#116 of 261 Old 03-04-2013, 01:20 PM
 
rachelsmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 1,583
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

Could you explain what you think it means then, because I'm totally lost. smile.gif

I think empirical evidence means evidence gathered by making measurements of something (e.g. Like measuring your height, or how fast your car is driving).


The science of vaccines is like measuring your kids' heights.  Yes, you got a fairly good measurement for that day (the kid wiggled, so it could be off a bit), but the height keeps changing.  Microbes continue to evolve, the rate of natural immunity continues to change, the amount of wild disease in circulation keeps changing, the background levels of various toxins keep changing, and the recommended vaccination schedule keeps changing.  On top of all that, each person's circumstances and medical history are a little different.

rachelsmama is offline  
#117 of 261 Old 03-04-2013, 01:24 PM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post


Well the thing is it is. And I wonder why we're here constantly if I'm honest!

Going to become a favourite of mine I see: "The great thing about science is its true whether it not you believe it" (or agree with it).

Well the thing is it isn't which again is why there are debates about this going on all the time across many different mediums involving many different people (including medical professionals, scientists and researchers etc....) we could go back and forth until the cows come home banghead.gif.....if you wonder why we are here I'm surprised you even bother. Even I can grasp the notion that  highly educated, smart thoughtful parents can review the science and come to different conclusions - that's why we are here. 


If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
#118 of 261 Old 03-04-2013, 01:32 PM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,371
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 101 Post(s)
Quote:
 Even I can grasp the notion that  highly educated, smart thoughtful parents can review the science and come to different conclusions

 

and let us not forget scientist also come to different conclusions too!! The notion that science is alway true is clearly not always the case, this is proven over and over again to be the case-by scientist!

 

 

 

 

Quote:
I'm totally lost.

Sorry you are lost I guess it's a justification of your belief.


 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
#119 of 261 Old 03-04-2013, 01:40 PM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,793
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by serenbat View Post

and let us not forget scientist also come to different conclusions too!! The notion that science is alway true is clearly not always the case, this is proven over and over again to be the case-by scientist!




Sorry you are lost I guess it's a justification of your belief.

No it's always true - although we might not always know what the truth is. smile.gif

And what?

Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is offline  
#120 of 261 Old 03-04-2013, 01:48 PM
 
IdentityCrisisMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 10,770
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 110 Post(s)

One of my favorite science quotes is, "Scientists often make the the mistake of assuming that everything they know is everything there is to know."  orngbiggrin.gif


Mama to DD September 2001 and DD April 2011 *Winner for most typos* eat.gif
IdentityCrisisMama is offline  
Reply

Tags
Vaccinations , The Vaccine Controversy The History Use And Safety Of Vaccinations , Saying No To Vaccines , Vaccines

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