[DrCaleb]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

$1:

Pro-vaxers first examine the evidence (multiple studies, all showing no serious side effects) and base their conclusion on that.

No. That's quite an assumption for a 'critical thinker'.

Most of them have completely forgotten the disaster predictions that never happened with West Nile, SARs, last years flu, the flu for the year before that and the year before that and simply accept that they need to get vaccinated or they have a "1 in 3 chance of dying". They didn't spend a moment 'examining' anything.

There are two important axioms to critical thought and using biased information.

- Because it has happened before is not evidence it will happen again

- Because it has never happened is not evidence it can not happen.

segno might be a pompous ass, but his argument and thought process is sound. Which is why people are attacking him personally, and not attacking his argument.

[Brenda]

I think Segno is the one attacking people personally.

[Akhenaten]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

There are two important axioms to critical thought and using biased information.

- Because it has happened before is not evidence it will happen again

- Because it has never happened is not evidence it can not happen.

segno might be a pompous ass, but his argument and thought process is sound. Which is why people are attacking him personally, and not attacking his argument.

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

$1:

Pro-vaxers first examine the evidence (multiple studies, all showing no serious side effects) and base their conclusion on that.

No. That's quite an assumption for a 'critical thinker'.

Most of them have completely forgotten the disaster predictions that never happened with West Nile, SARs, last years flu, the flu for the year before that and the year before that and simply accept that they need to get vaccinated or they have a "1 in 3 chance of dying". They didn't spend a moment 'examining' anything.

There are two important axioms to critical thought and using biased information.

- Because it has happened before is not evidence it will happen again

- Because it has never happened is not evidence it can not happen.

segno might be a pompous ass, but his argument and thought process is sound. Which is why people are attacking him personally, and not attacking his argument.

Dude. I never made any of those assertions you think I'm making. I made a comment in reply to his 'pro-vaxers are critical thinkers, they examine evidence, blah blah blah"

No, they didn't. That's a pompous assmumption. Nor is there a single personal attack in that sentence. Brenda is right: the only one constantly making personal attacks here is him.

[DrCaleb]

Brenda Brenda:

I think Segno is the one attacking people personally.

His calling people 'anti-vaxers' is indeed turning people emotional toward him. But offhand, I can't remember him using the sort of insults that have been used against him.

He's trying to not make it personal, from my perspective at least.

[segno]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

raydan raydan:

The panic has started.
Police had to be called in yesterday when the clinic close to where I live ran out of the vaccine and a lot of people were left outside waiting for their shot.
Emergency rooms are filling up with people that have "flu-like" symptoms and only about 1 tenth of those people actually require medical attention.

What did they expect? They've been beating the H1N1 war drums for months. Then finally they put out the sandwich board:

H1N1 Vaccinations here
------->

And then wonder why people are lined up around the block. And getting irate when they run out of vaccine.

Piss poor planning.

There have actually been a lot of problems with the whole vaccination problem.

Yields of the vaccine are a little lower than expected, leading to delays in the roll-out and shortages. That was a biological problem (something about the egg-cultures not being as productive for H1N1 vaccines as for other strains). And the companies making the vaccines were slow in reporting the problems with production timetables.

We've gotten conflicting information from various agencies about who should get vaccinated and who is most at risk.

The biggest danger is that the anti-vax side will use it as a way to attack the entire reason for getting vaccinated (OMG! They were late shipping the vaccine, so it is now toxic!).

Hopefully more reasonable people will be able to use this as a learning experience to help figure out how to deal with these situations in the future.

[Brenda]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Brenda Brenda:

I think Segno is the one attacking people personally.

His calling people 'anti-vaxers' is indeed turning people emotional toward him. But offhand, I can't remember him using the sort of insults that have been used against him.

He's trying to not make it personal, from my perspective at least.

I guess you missed the part where he called me a "bad mother"?

[segno]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Brenda Brenda:

I think Segno is the one attacking people personally.

His calling people 'anti-vaxers' is indeed turning people emotional toward him. But offhand, I can't remember him using the sort of insults that have been used against him.

He's trying to not make it personal, from my perspective at least.

Actually, I have been quite abrasive, and insulting in the past, both in this thread and the other one in the health forum.

I freely admit it, and I'll probably do so again.

But you are right... the anti-vaxers (for lack of a better term) DO tend to avoid attacking my arguments. The best example was when I pointed out how a person's decision not to get vaccinated could end up harming others. Instead of dealing with the arguments I posted, people accuse me of saying anti-vaxers "murder" people and that I'm trying to lay a "guilt trip" on others. Note one has come out to challenge the points that I had made.

[raydan]

Brenda Brenda:

I guess you missed the part where he called me a "bad mother"?

I laughed when I read this Brenda.
This is what popped into my head (I apologize in advance).

Call me a murderer, call me an idiot, but NEVER, EVER call me a bad mother!

[Brenda]

raydan raydan:

Brenda Brenda:

I guess you missed the part where he called me a "bad mother"?

I laughed when I read this Brenda.
This is what popped into my head (I apologize in advance).

Call me a murderer, call me an idiot, but NEVER, EVER call me a bad mother!

[Brenda]

$1:

the anti-vaxers (for lack of a better term) DO tend to avoid attacking my arguments.

Maybe you should call it "anti-flu-vaxers". Because I don't think this is about any other vaccination than the flu vaccine.

[DrCaleb]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

$1:

Pro-vaxers first examine the evidence (multiple studies, all showing no serious side effects) and base their conclusion on that.

No. That's quite an assumption for a 'critical thinker'.

Most of them have completely forgotten the disaster predictions that never happened with West Nile, SARs, last years flu, the flu for the year before that and the year before that and simply accept that they need to get vaccinated or they have a "1 in 3 chance of dying". They didn't spend a moment 'examining' anything.

Dude. I never made any of those assertions you think I'm making. I made a comment in reply to his 'pro-vaxers are critical thinkers, they examine evidence, blah blah blah"

No, they didn't. That's a pompous assmumption. Nor is there a single personal attack in that sentence. Brenda is right: the only one constantly making personal attacks here is him.

Dude, you are the only one repeating that disproven argument, so they are your assertions.

And the 'attack' sentence wasn't directed at you, it was directed at everyone.

EG:

$1:

First off pinhead, the wikipedia phrase you quoted wasn't referring to YOU specifically.
....

And finally, if you are going to accuse me of disseminating false information you better make fucking sure you KNOW that for a fact. Fucking troll.

[image of troll spray]

As one example.

I see nothing from him that quite rises to this level of personal attack. I can't see anything from him that rises to any level of 'personal attack'.

I also don't see anyone trying to disprove his argument, I only see people trying to disprove his opinion. In doing so, they are basically have no choice but to attack him personally.

People really should study 'critical thinking' if they want to understand it.

[DrCaleb]

segno segno:

But you are right... the anti-vaxers (for lack of a better term) DO tend to avoid attacking my arguments. The best example was when I pointed out how a person's decision not to get vaccinated could end up harming others. Instead of dealing with the arguments I posted, people accuse me of saying anti-vaxers "murder" people and that I'm trying to lay a "guilt trip" on others. Note one has come out to challenge the points that I had made.

They attack you personally, because you do the same thing to them by labelling them 'anti-vaxers'. It's attacking their opinion, just the same as they are doing to you.

My opinion is just that - mine. Trying to disprove it is a waste of time, because it is impossible to disprove that my opinion is my opinion.

Focus on what they base that opinion on, that is the only way to convince someone their point of view is incorrect. And being abrasive doesn't win you any friends.

[Akhenaten]

Dr>Celeb:

$1:

Dude, you are the only one repeating that disproven argument, so they are your assertions.

(sigh) Okay now you're just making crap up as you go along.

You're right: everyone that wants a vaccination took the time to examine all the evidence and made a well thought out non-bias decision using 'critical thought'.
Whatever.

The dude already made a bunch of looney assertions as to my comments on this subject yesterday - complete with citing posts I never made and ignoring anything positive I said about vaccinations and just continued on with his 'witch hunt' venacular of 'anti-vaccination people'. He's trying hard to live that down today.

[Akhenaten]

DrCaleb

$1:

I see nothing from him that quite rises to this level of personal attack. I can't see anything from him that rises to any level of 'personal attack'.

Very next post:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

They attack you personally, because you do the same thing to them by labelling them 'anti-vaxers'. It's attacking their opinion, just the same as they are doing to you.

k, whatever.

[segno]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

Dr>Celeb:

$1:

Dude, you are the only one repeating that disproven argument, so they are your assertions.

(sigh) Okay now you're just making crap up as you go along.

You're right: everyone that wants a vaccination took the time to examine all the evidence and made a well thought out non-bias decision using 'critical thought'.
Whatever.

Which is, of course, another failure in logic.

Nobody here claimed that everyone wanting a vaccination took the time to examine the evidence. Its a straw man. Some take the vaccination because of the over-hype, or simply because that's what their doctor told them to do.

(Virtually) All critical thinkers are pro-vaccination. Not all pro-vaccination people are critical thinkers.

$1:

The dude already made a bunch of looney assertions as to my comments on this subject yesterday - complete with citing posts I never made...

I quoted a post that you made, and gave the exact date/time you made it. You turned around and denied you made it. Anyone with 30 seconds of time could tell you were lying.

I was under the assumption you were 'trolling'... you thought I was being too mean/insulting when I was posting against PublicAnimalNo9, so you decided to 'annoy' me. I felt no need to respond.