solid7 said:
Do I proselytize? Please, elaborate...
On the flip side of proselytizing, you love to use words like "If you want to live", and "you need", etc. A bit megalomaniacal. Your arguments have left absolutely no room for anything outside of your own point of view. That there are people who are made sick by the vaccines?
Contrary to the notion of herd immunity... Maybe you'd like to offer you unerring and infallible wisdom on the subject of people who get vaccinated, and still don't achieve immunity? Flu victims who got the flu shot. Or even further, the doctors who then threat them with antibiotics, which then give birth to resistant strains? Because that doesn't happen, does it? Me + 5% stacks up exactly how, in numbers, to those who are abusing pharmaceuticals? (whose makers are only too happy to oblige)
Where do all of these horrible outbreaks come from? I'm sure that you've surmised that the root cause is non-vaccinated people. You gave the example of people losing hearing to measles. Great. Keep going...
no antivaxers in general proselytize. hence "ilk".
i mean you might proselytize, ive just never noticed it.
vaccinations of flue are always ineffective. always have been. perhaps they always will be.
the flue virus... and alot of viruses in genral mutate on a regular basis. we are very lucky that the flue virus isnt that deadly...
some seasons the flue vaccine is only good for like 30% of the flue strains. some other seasons its alot better.
this has absolutly nothing to do with imminuty. it has to do with how vaccines are made. it takes a long time to develope a vaccine and produce enough antigens. often times new flue strains evolve while the new flue vaccine is being turned out.
you dont give someone antibiotics for the flue... you should really be embarrassed by the fact that you dont know the difference between a viral infection and a bacterial infection. i think we learned that in elementary school.
lol they dont even oprate via a similar mechanism. a vaccine gives your body antigens that are safe, yet close enough to the real thing to allow your immune system to fight off a real virus.
an antibiotic is basically just a drug that is toxic to the offending bacteria, and less tocix ( hopefully alot less toxic)to your body. some of the extreme antibiotics are VERY VERY toxic... in the same ball park as alot of chemotherapy treatments. there are antibiotics that can kill super reistant shit... but it also attacks your colon or renal system etc.
and no... the trend towards resistance is NOT the same mechanism at all. getting a vaccine is like making a house more fire proof... assuming your immune system is functioning properly and you can make the proper antibody. taking a dose of antibiotics is like putting out a fire inside your house afere it starts.
the likelihood of hosing down a house and missing a little blob of fire, or a little blob of fire becoming water resistant( some how...) is naturally going to be far and away more likely.
now you can still have a whole city that is mostly fire proof, and have a new type of fire roll in and burn the whole palce down. but you are NOT hugly encouraging the development( selective pressure) of new and improved viruses by vaccinating simply because its your body that is doing to killing of small viral loads and not a simple chemical with a single mechanism of action being exposed to a population of trillions and trillions of microbes.
yes vaccine resistance has been observed... but its on the order of several decades, and its only for certain types of viruses that are prone to mutating.
your body recognizes viruses and shit by the proteins that are on the surface of these crazy looking virus machine things. some of these viruses have a genome that is prone to mutating in a way that changes around features on this protien coating that protects the virus RNA... this is helpful because it makes "evolution" or resistance more likely than a completely random roll of the dice... where the virus cannot reproduce etc.
these routine changes to viruses are usually easy to defeat though. yo can use similar tools that you used to defeat the virus in the first palce. you just have to show your body some inert antigens... this just takes a long time, like 1 year at the lowest.
for these types of viruses, they issue "booster" reccomendations. i think i had to get a booster for meningitis after like 9 years? its the same for other shit, and booster requirements vary in different countries with different viral loads etc.
anway, antibiotics abuse is a serious problem that was elucidated by science ironically... the same breed of folks telling you that vaccines are safe.
antiobiotic resistant strains of shit like staph come about due to simple selection. to make things worse, alot of the antibiotics we rely on are single modal... meaning that they only kill via one mechanism. once you defeat that mechanism you win essentially... this is why you treat resistant shit with coctails of antibiotics similar to how you treat aids patients with coctails of anti retroviral drugs.
with a drug cocktail, or mixed regime of antibiotics you can increase you chance of killing off microbes that are resistant to one or more antibiotic.
the subsequent likelyhood that a microbe becomes resistant to not one, but two, or three different antibiotic kill mechanisms plummets alot.
shit is emerging that is resistant to many of these antibiotics though... some people think this is due to some bacteria being able to exchange RNA or DNA via some vague mechanism that i dont really understand.
the implication of that gene exchange is... one resistant microbe can exchange its dna with another microbe that is resistant to another thing... and so on etc. its really quite a facinating, though macabe issue if you think about it
regardless of the above, it has literally 0 to do with vaccines. again you ought to be embarrassed by the fact that you dont know that.
i think its telling that you invest more time in your characterization of myself being some ahab meglomaniac, and spinning out totally irrelevant shit like opioid addition.... and ALOT less time in thoughtfull defense of your position.
perhaps your position is indefensible and dogmatic? dosent that make you an ideologue?