JFKvsNixon Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Yes. As far as possible, of course the ingredients of drugs should be available to patients (with exceptions where that's not possible e.g. emergencies etc). A simple printed list would suffice- just as prescribed drugs contain printed lists of potential side effects etc. Just as ingredients are legally required on foods- it enables people to make important decisions about what they eat. So as long as the ingredients are in the public domain, you're happy with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 A lot of those labelled as 'anti-vaccine' are not against vaccines per se. A lot of them probably approve smallpox vaccine, single measles vaccine, etc- yet oppose compulsory vaccines, giving of close to 50 vaccines to under 6's, giving flu vaccines to under 5's etc, etc. Some of these people do not have an issue with vaccines- they have an issue with the extent of modern vaccination programs. They are strong on personal liberty, and so oppose compulsory vaccines. They mistrust quoted pro-vaccine studies because they are aware of pharmaceutical company corruption/influence of such sources. Now, with veganism growing stronger, some are going to have an issue with lack of vegan vaccines. You've got a lot of people opposing these aspects, who are not necessarily anti-vaccine per se I'm a libertarian, but there are limits. What's the plan? Nationalise pharmacology? Not very libertarian. Scepticism of studies performed by those who have a vested interest in a particular result is perfectly reasonable. When the number and size of such studies reaches a certain critical mass, then it becomes implausible that their results are not broadly correct. Don't forget that the pharmaceutical companies are in heavy competition with each other. If one pharmaceutical company was pulling a serious fast one, surely one of the others would like nothing better than to show that. Not to mention that some of the studies in each of these cases are academic and state funded. Even the privately funded ones are usually performed by reputable academics. I know a lot of academics and they're subject to influence and positive thinking, but you'll have a job getting them to outright lie. The scale of the conspiracy necessary to support the anti-vac hypotheses is implausible in the extreme. ---------- Post added 02-03-2016 at 11:46 ---------- You do realise that there's also a lot of genuine stuff on youtube? Or do you just dismiss any youtube video as worthless, regardless of it's actual content? You can't trust it. Very easy to fake. And anecdotal so not subject to proper statistical analysis. If it were real it would also (or only) be published in academic journals so that the data and methods could be critically evaluated by other experts. That's how we separate useful information from bovine excrement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natjack Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Are there some peer reviewed trials we can see to get an idea of its effectiveness?Probably not, just personal experience over the last 15 years or so. Take it daily from end of October to end of March, boosts your immune system for the year. Try it, what have you got to lose, it won't kill you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 A lot of those labelled as 'anti-vaccine' are not against vaccines per se. A lot of them probably approve smallpox vaccine, single measles vaccine, etc- yet oppose compulsory vaccines, giving of close to 50 vaccines to under 6's, giving flu vaccines to under 5's etc, etc. You keep banging on about the flu, despite me showing you the figures for how many <5's would die... The jab is less harmful than dying from the flu. Some of these people do not have an issue with vaccines- they have an issue with the extent of modern vaccination programs. They are strong on personal liberty, and so oppose compulsory vaccines. They mistrust quoted pro-vaccine studies because they are aware of pharmaceutical company corruption/influence of such sources. They ignore the fact that going unvaccinated puts other people at risk. It's a similar argument to the ones that smokers made about personal liberty. If you're not trying to educate those who you see as being 'ignorant', what are you trying to achieve on this thread? A fair question. I'm trying to ensure that anyone who stumbles onto this thread doesn't see unchallenged nonsense from anti vaccers and conspiracy nuts and thus believes it. It's not about educating you or Mac, it's about trying to ensure that nobody else thinks you're credible. You do realise that there's also a lot of genuine stuff on youtube? Or do you just dismiss any youtube video as worthless, regardless of it's actual content? Yes, I dismiss anything on youtube as worthless if we're having a serious discussion and someone tries to use it to present evidence. On the other hand, it contains many hilarious videos of kittens and cats, and I believe a monkey peeing into it's own mouth. These video's are not worthless, they have great comedy value. Perhaps I should try to see the comedy value in conspiracy videos as well. ---------- Post added 02-03-2016 at 11:54 ---------- Probably not, just personal experience over the last 15 years or so. Take it daily from end of October to end of March, boosts your immune system for the year. Try it, what have you got to lose, it won't kill you Unlike big pharma, the supplements industry IS unregulated and they will lie to you about the effectiveness of their pills. It's ironic that people won't trust one of the most heavily regulated and scientific industries on the planet, but they will instead trust unregulated charlatans who will sell you a sugar pill for as many $$$ as they can get away with. They'll make grand sounding, yet slightly vague claims about how it "boosts your immune system", all without the slightest shred of evidence. (A boosted immune system is called auto immune disease by the way). And if you were previously immuno compromised then you'd be dead already or living in a plastic bubble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 So as long as the ingredients are in the public domain, you're happy with it? ??? No. like I said- a printed list of ingredients to be given to patient or their guardian, for each vaccination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgtkate Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 I think that he's labelling people who are skeptical of the skeptics as being skeptics. Aren't the skeptics those boney bird like creatures from the Dark Crystal? http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/darkcrystal/images/0/04/SkekTek.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20080506231902 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Unlike big pharma, the supplements industry IS unregulated and they will lie to you about the effectiveness of their pills. It's ironic that people won't trust one of the most heavily regulated and scientific industries on the planet, but they will instead trust unregulated charlatans who will sell you a sugar pill for as many $$$ as they can get away with. They'll make grand sounding, yet slightly vague claims about how it "boosts your immune system", all without the slightest shred of evidence. Yes but they'll have videos on youtube. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgtkate Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 ??? No. like I said- a printed list of ingredients to be given to patient or their guardian, for each vaccination. But unless everyone has a medical degree that information is pointless unless it is interpreted along the lines of: Formaldehyde - used to inert a virus - proven safe millions of times Aluminium compounds - helps the vaccine work more effectively - proven safe millions of times ...etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 ??? No. like I said- a printed list of ingredients to be given to patient or their guardian, for each vaccination. I'm wasn't talking about vaccinations, I was talking about animal products in routine drugs and IV fluids. Some routine drugs and IV fluids also contain animal products, should every ingredient of a drug or IV fluid listed to every patient before every administration of them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natjack Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Unlike big pharma, the supplements industry IS unregulated and they will lie to you about the effectiveness of their pills. It's ironic that people won't trust one of the most heavily regulated and scientific industries on the planet, but they will instead trust unregulated charlatans who will sell you a sugar pill for as many $$$ as they can get away with. They'll make grand sounding, yet slightly vague claims about how it "boosts your immune system", all without the slightest shred of evidence. I'm making the definite claim because I believe myself. But I'll mention it at Holland&Barrett next time I call in. "Cyclone" on Sheffield Forum thinks you're all charlatans ... I'm sure they'll be quaking in their shoes. As well as the odd aberrant apostrophe, you're going for $$$ now? Why? What's wrong with £££? It's probably all the placebo effect, I think I'm going to be protected, and therefore I am protected. *wanders off jauntily, whistling, hands in pockets* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now