Vaccination and Religious Beliefs

[Shadow Wolf]

It does appear that most studies show that marijuana use isn't good for schizophrenia. As you say, the rest is inconclusive at the moment.
Some studies show that people who are already predisposed to schizophrenia that smoke pot as a child or teen can hasten the onset of schizophrenia or exacerbate the symptoms. While others say that people who are schizophrenic may be more likely to smoke marijuana than the general population.

Historically there haven't been a ton of studies done in the US on marijuana due to it's categorization as a Schedule 1 Drug.

I read a study some years ago that concluded those with mental illnesses are more likely to use marijuana, and that further study is needed into this. The researchers themselves emphasized this does not mean marijuana necessarily leads to mental illness, and no other conclusions between this correlation should be drawn other than it seems those with mental illnesses are more likely to use marijuana. The media, however, seems to have missed that point.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Yes I am schizo, but that doesn't mean I know everything about being schizo, or how we are born that way.

You said:

“Just because you are autistic, doesn't mean you know all about it, I'm schizophrenic and I know I don't know everything about it,na, that wont work with me, Lisa.”


Then I said this:

“Well it appears you know even less about it [autism spectrum disorder], if you actually believe vaccines are the cause of it.
Maybe just try taking in some information from somebody who knows what they're talking about.”


To which you said:

“How do you know that ?.”


Then I replied:

“Um, because you keep saying vaccines cause autism. And also you are not autistic.”


So you see, I was pointing out that you know less about Autism Spectrum Disorder than someone who has it AND that your assertion that vaccines are the cause of it is baloney given that there’s no evidence for your claim.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I read a study some years ago that concluded those with mental illnesses are more likely to use marijuana, and that further study is needed into this. The researchers themselves emphasized this does not mean marijuana necessarily leads to mental illness, and no other conclusions between this correlation should be drawn other than it seems those with mental illnesses are more likely to use marijuana. The media, however, seems to have missed that point.

Yes exactly. I've read a couple of studies that say the same thing. The fact that someone has a mental illness in the first place may just predispose them to seek out and use marijuana as a kind of escape from the mental illness. But it can't really be said at this point that marijuana uses causes mental illness.

And yeah, the media seems to miss the point on just about everything. Hence the need for primary sources!

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Something I just realized: those who claim vaccines cause autism have never specified if it causes high-functioning or low-functioning autism. All I've ever heard from them is that it causes autism, but they seem to neglect that autism is not just autism and it comes in many forms.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It certainly is a claim repeated over and over by the pharmaceutical companies which manufacture the vaccines. How demonstrable this claim is at benefiting health is another question since it is the vaccines themselves which have been spreading the diseases, which the claim was they were supposed to prevent, along with causing other harmful consequences to overall health.


"The research is hard to ignore, vaccines can trigger autoimmunity with a laundry list of diseases to follow. With harmful and toxic metals as some vaccine ingredients, who is susceptible and which individuals are more at risk?


No one would accuse Yehuda Shoenfeld of being a quack. The Israeli clinician has spent more than three decades studying the human immune system and is at the pinnacle of his profession. You might say he is more foundation than fringe in his specialty; he wrote the textbooks. The Mosaic of Autoimmunity, Autoantibodies, Diagnostic Criteria in Autoimmune Diseases, Infection and Autoimmunity, Cancer and Autoimmunity – the list is 25 titles long and some of them are cornerstones of clinical practice. Hardly surprising that Shoenfeld has been called the "Godfather of Autoimmunology" – the study of the immune system turned on itself in a wide array of diseases from type 1 diabetes to ulcerative colitis and multiple sclerosis.


But something strange is happening in the world of immunology lately and a small evidence of it is that the Godfather of Autoimmunology is pointing to vaccines – specifically, some of their ingredients including the toxic metal aluminum – as a significant contributor to the growing global epidemic of autoimmune diseases."

Attacking Ourselves: Top Doctors Reveal Vaccines Turn Our Immune

It is not assumed that vaccines save lives – it is something that we know from the observation and study of the history of medicine and human populations. You can deny all you want that thousands and thousands of people (mostly children) have contracted and/or died or suffered permanent damage from the diseases we are talking about. Do you think it’s a just a bizarre coincidence that the introduction of vaccines led to a dramatic decrease in the prevalence and incidence of these diseases or the outright eradication of some, like smallpox, for instance?


Here’s the abstract from one of the studies cited in your GreenMedInfo article:

“Vaccinations have been used as an essential tool in the fight against infectious diseases, and succeeded in improving public health. However, adverse effects, including autoimmune conditions may occur following vaccinations (autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants--ASIA syndrome). It has been postulated that autoimmunity could be triggered or enhanced by the vaccine immunogen contents, as well as by adjuvants, which are used to increase the immune reaction to the immunogen. Fortunately, vaccination-related ASIA is uncommon. Yet, by defining individuals at risk we may further limit the number of individuals developing post-vaccination ASIA. In this perspective we defined four groups of individuals who might be susceptible to develop vaccination-induced ASIA: patients with prior post-vaccination autoimmune phenomena, patients with a medical history of autoimmunity, patients with a history of allergic reactions, and individuals who are prone to develop autoimmunity (having a family history of autoimmune diseases; asymptomatic carriers of autoantibodies; carrying certain genetic profiles, etc.).”


The authors point out that this problem is an uncommon one, but that it can occur in a small number of people who are vaccinated, namely “patients with prior post-vaccination autoimmune phenomena, patients with a medical history of autoimmunity, patients with a history of allergic reactions, and individuals who are prone to develop autoimmunity.” This is not something I see anyone denying on this thread. In fact, several people on this thread (including myself) have already pointed out that some people, due to pre-existing conditions, cannot be vaccinated which is why it’s important for those who do not suffer from such conditions get vaccinated – to protect the people who cannot be vaccinated! I pointed out that my niece is one of those children who cannot be vaccinated due to an illness she was born with. Something as simple as the common cold could kill her.

The study is not saying that vaccines cause autoimmune disorders in everyone who is vaccinated. Far from it.

 

[psychoslice]

You most likely know more about what it is to be schizophrenic than the average person.

And once again, there is no evidence that shows that vaccines cause autism.

Yes I suppose I would know more about it than the average person, there is a lot of evidence, but lets not go there again, time will tell the truth.

 

[SomeRandom]

Yes I suppose I would know more about it than the average person, there is a lot of evidence, but lets not go there again, time will tell the truth.

I would much rather an autistic child than a child with whooping cough or the Spanish flu or God forbid Polio. Like maybe it's because I know many wonderful autistic people (both unvaccinated and vaccinated, since we're using personal anecdotes so much here.)
Also, I feel like the poor autistic people (both high and low functioning) have become pawns in this stupid vaccine war, much like sexually abused children have become pawns in the stupid war on gay people. The anti vaxxers are all like "ZOMG!! Vaccines cause autism and autism is so much worse than a dead kid." They might not say those exact words, but it's implicitly implied in this viewpoint. Because the chances of a bad reaction to vaccines are about the same for someone dying having a routine appendectomy.( We don't ban appendectomies because of this, though.) And the illnesses that we vaccinate against are worse than autism any day of the week
Similarly anti gay people say "ZOMG! Gay people, the scourge of the earth, are that way because they were sexually abused as kids. Therefore sexually abused kids are scum." Again, they might not say those exact words but it's implicitly implied in their viewpoint. Because they call sexual abuse a cause of, as they see it, some perversion or abomination. It stands to reason that sexually abused kids as that is the supposed cause of this perversion, is equally as abominable.
Can we maybe highlight that the usages of both phenomenons are awful and outright insulting to those particular people?
I mean by all means, study said phenomenons and all that stuff. But Autism isn't some god awful condition. Autistic people have strengths and weaknesses like all people, those strengths and weaknesses are just different from the average person. And sexually abused children and their relationship with sexual orientation is very complicated and largely depends on the individual and circumstances.
.
And if vaccines cause autism, kindly specify where exactly on the Autism spectrum this is affecting? Does this include high functioning Autistic people? Just low functioning? Does it cause Aspergers Syndrome as well? Like Shadow has said, Autism isn't just "Autism" which you can then point to a particular boogeyman, it's FAR FAR more complicated than that.

 

[philbo]

Yes I suppose I would know more about it than the average person, there is a lot of evidence, but lets not go there again, time will tell the truth.

My reading of what you've written in this thread is that you believe more unevidenced rubbish than the average person - if there is a lot of evidence, don't just say "google it, it's out there" because what you'll get is dubious rubbish like that link that InChrist gave: something purporting to be evidence of the link between vaccines and autism, but on a trivial amount of investigation proving to be nothing of the kind.

If you think there's a lot of evidence, quote it. Link to it - let people know what you consider to be evidence and why you think it has more weight than the sorts of studies I & others have linked to which show no correlation between vaccines and autism whatsoever. Unless you can do this, I for one (and I'll bet I'm not the only one here) will continue to think that you're misusing the word "know" in your first sentence.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

My reading of what you've written in this thread is that you believe more unevidenced rubbish than the average person - if there is a lot of evidence, don't just say "google it, it's out there" because what you'll get is dubious rubbish like that link that InChrist gave: something purporting to be evidence of the link between vaccines and autism, but on a trivial amount of investigation proving to be nothing of the kind.[/COLOR]

If you read the article provided by InChrist, it clearly states that the case study involves the first patient to ever be described with such a condition, and there are many unknowns as to the whys, and they do not actually know why that girl developed autism.

 

[philbo]

If you read the article provided by InChrist, it clearly states that the case study involves the first patient to ever be described with such a condition, and there are many unknowns as to the whys, and they do not actually know why that girl developed autism.

I think you might have misattributed that quote - I did have a read of InChrist's link, and a closer look at maybe 15-20 of the abstracts quoted. Most of them aren't even relevant, there's individual case studies, which from a proof of causality perspective are useless. There is nothing in any of the ones I looked at which supported the title of the article. I wouldn't mind betting that pretty much everyone who has linked to that article and believes it supports a link between autism and vaccination has not looked at any of the source material.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I think you might have misattributed that quote - I did have a read of InChrist's link, and a closer look at maybe 15-20 of the abstracts quoted. Most of them aren't even relevant, there's individual case studies, which from a proof of causality perspective are useless. There is nothing in any of the ones I looked at which supported the title of the article. I wouldn't mind betting that pretty much everyone who has linked to that article and believes it supports a link between autism and vaccination has not looked at any of the source material.

I was thinking specifically of one link. It did come from a credible source (NHSC I think), but it was a case study involving the first known patient with such a condition, and while it didn't answer any questions, it did raise many. But, no where did caution against the use of vaccines.

 

[philbo]

I was thinking specifically of one link. It did come from a credible source (NHSC I think), but it was a case study involving the first known patient with such a condition, and while it didn't answer any questions, it did raise many. But, no where did caution against the use of vaccines.

Sorry, I've just realized the one you mean (this one) - the one InChrist quoted that wasn't the gish gallop I was thinking of.

Also realized exactly why: that paper was enough to get a multi-million payout for the author & parent of the child in question (far be it from me to suggest any conflict of interest, here), so has been touted by many as "proof" of vaccine-caused autism, even though the paper itself doesn't go there, and the court's judgment doesn't either.

 

[psychoslice]

My reading of what you've written in this thread is that you believe more unevidenced rubbish than the average person - if there is a lot of evidence, don't just say "google it, it's out there" because what you'll get is dubious rubbish like that link that InChrist gave: something purporting to be evidence of the link between vaccines and autism, but on a trivial amount of investigation proving to be nothing of the kind.

If you think there's a lot of evidence, quote it. Link to it - let people know what you consider to be evidence and why you think it has more weight than the sorts of studies I & others have linked to which show no correlation between vaccines and autism whatsoever. Unless you can do this, I for one (and I'll bet I'm not the only one here) will continue to think that you're misusing the word "know" in your first sentence.

Google it.

 

[dgirl1986]

Aborted feotuses? According to who?

 

[SomeRandom]

Google it.

Because Google never has any misinformation nor outright lies on it, right? *Ahem*

Googling Ex Gay therapy will lead you to sites which use "testimonies" to "prove" that Ex Gay therapy works.........Despite it being largely discredited by not only people in the multiple fields of mental health, but people in multiple Scientific Disciplines. Even Anthropologists!

Googling Flat Earth will give you links to people who try to disprove the notion that the Earth is round. Despite.......well you know?

Googling Gravity will give you links to sites which try to disprove the laws of gravity in favor of.......well take your pick of "alternate" theories.

Also there's this implication that Googling something for a couple of minutes instantly makes you better informed than PEOPLE WHO STUDY THIS IN DEPTH FOR YEARS. I'll be the first to say that there's Doctors out there with God Complexes, but even they do not have that much hubris. I, as well as many other laymen not arrogant enough to assume Googling something is on par with years of studying something in depth, would much rather get information from people who are not only trained to distinguish the good and the bad in their field (in relation to studies) but who are far more knowledgeable about said subject than some Yahoo proudly proclaiming that Google has all the answers. I think even the owners of Google would take umbrage with such a notion.

I mean, there's skepticism and then there's listening to Snake Oil Salesman.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Because Google never has any misinformation nor outright lies on it, right? *Ahem*

When I was Googling stuff about ISIS and N. Korea earlier, it showed a link that was claiming ISIS held Kim Jong-Un as a hostage.

 

[psychoslice]

Because Google never has any misinformation nor outright lies on it, right? *Ahem*

Googling Ex Gay therapy will lead you to sites which use "testimonies" to "prove" that Ex Gay therapy works.........Despite it being largely discredited by not only people in the multiple fields of mental health, but people in multiple Scientific Disciplines. Even Anthropologists!

Googling Flat Earth will give you links to people who try to disprove the notion that the Earth is round. Despite.......well you know?

Googling Gravity will give you links to sites which try to disprove the laws of gravity in favor of.......well take your pick of "alternate" theories.

Also there's this implication that Googling something for a couple of minutes instantly makes you better informed than PEOPLE WHO STUDY THIS IN DEPTH FOR YEARS. I'll be the first to say that there's Doctors out there with God Complexes, but even they do not have that much hubris. I, as well as many other laymen not arrogant enough to assume Googling something is on par with years of studying something in depth, would much rather get information from people who are not only trained to distinguish the good and the bad in their field (in relation to studies) but who are far more knowledgeable about said subject than some Yahoo proudly proclaiming that Google has all the answers. I think even the owners of Google would take umbrage with such a notion.

I mean, there's skepticism and then there's listening to Snake Oil Salesman.

Yes, you just need the intelligence to decipher the truth from fiction.

 

[McBell]

Yes, you just need the intelligence to decipher the truth from fiction.

Or the arrogance to not care...

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Yes, you just need the intelligence to decipher the truth from fiction.

You still haven't been able to show us anything official from the CDC over this alleged apology.

 

[psychoslice]

Or the arrogance to not care...

Yea that can be so also, just take your pick.