Cancer Vaccines

[Ellie]

You are also taking what you're being fed in exactly the same way. There is absolutely no difference. I would rather believe what a professional says with the risk it's wrong, than believe something some nutjob on youtube says which is far more likely to be wrong.

 

[tysonrss]

If you read most of my posts, you'd see that's the opposite of what I do. I actually do the research on these things and just don't go off of hearsay.

It's still sad that you would rather believe a "Professional" then do your own research. Replace the word "Scientist" with "Professional" in that article I posted above. (btw, there are plenty of professionals on the conspiracy side too <_< of course you wouldn't know this since you don't watch the "nutjobs")The fact of you saying they're "most more likely to be wrong" is just your opinion.

 

[Daxis]

Don't believe everything someone tells you. Do your own research. I do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H77ktqya8MU
great research

But this asinine rhetoric about how vaccines are the key to every virus or sickness just well...sickens me! Especially when people take verbatim, what they're being fed without actually looking up on it. It's like if a guy gives you a gun and says "don't worry, it's not loaded" and when you're playing around with and act like you're about to blow your head off, and pull the trigger. Low and behold there was a bullet in it! But you trusted some guy or a friend that said otherwise.

no one says vaccines are th ekey to every virus/sickness, nor is it touted as being perfect.
luckily, we're not trusting some friend/guy, we're trusting licensed professionals run by governments, hospitals, and in general organizations. We're not listening to just 1 singular guy who's saying some crap, we're listening to raw data backed by numerous people that have degrees. hum

The typical response

means that you've done this before, gotten similar responses that you are wrong, and so you trudge on with your minority ideal becuase you're correct and everyone else is wrong, even though we've tried telling you that you are wrong, lots of times.
you think there might be some meaning in this?


oh yeah btw you've used a crapload of rhetoric so far, so you've got that nail down.
now er

you havent presented any facts

 

[Ellie]

You may "do the research", yes, but this research is always secondary not primary - i.e. you are reading reports from somebody else. Or, even, somebody else's interpretation of said reports.

So again, I state my own opinion copied from my post above but with different wording,

I would rather believe a professional's interpretation of the research than somebody else's interpretation of the research. I know that I personally cannot take in all of the research. If I studied the research professionally, it would take months, as you cannot acertain anything from one trial or one report; even if I was just studying medical journals it would take a long time to actually get a hypothesis together.

I don't watch the nutjobs because that does not qualify as research, not in any professional sense.

My idea of the word professional is the same as scientific and scientific means something it is not just a throwaround word as you are suggesting. (Again, I suggest reading Bad Science which would show you what I mean by "professional" and/or "scientific".

It is good to be sceptical, but you have to be sceptical of everything. You can't just decide to be sceptical about EVIL SCIENCE and instead not be sceptical about "alternatives".

 

[tysonrss]

I'm skeptical and hold a silver tongue on any subject that I know may have been proved to be phony time and again. When you have liars running things and many people that do things for money, then one should always be vigilant, regardless of how they feel or what their interpretation is. It's either always something, or it's ever really nothing. Given the world we live in though, I've been more accustomed to the former while you're moreso accustomed to the latter.

 

[Fusty]

Hmm... somehow I saw this thread coming...
Either you're a troll, or you're someone with a very fucked up mind, I don't know which one is worse.

I was surfing the net on the usual politics crap and came upon this

If that's "your research" then I think I'll stick to the research that actually involves testing stuff.

Guess that's what happens when you present logic into an argument.

How is your story even close to logic...?
You're basically saying: Hey everything is a conspiracy, oh and I have youtube videos to prove it.

 

[Ellie]

Then why are you more sceptical of those saying it works than those saying it doesn't? The ones saying it does are medical institutions which go through rigorous testing and scientific procedure; the ones that don't are far more likely to be in it for the money, especially these youtube folk.

 

[tysonrss]

Don't believe everything someone tells you. Do your own research. I do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H77ktqya8MU
great research

But this asinine rhetoric about how vaccines are the key to every virus or sickness just well...sickens me! Especially when people take verbatim, what they're being fed without actually looking up on it. It's like if a guy gives you a gun and says "don't worry, it's not loaded" and when you're playing around with and act like you're about to blow your head off, and pull the trigger. Low and behold there was a bullet in it! But you trusted some guy or a friend that said otherwise.

no one says vaccines are th ekey to every virus/sickness, nor is it touted as being perfect.
luckily, we're not trusting some friend/guy, we're trusting licensed professionals run by governments, hospitals, and in general organizations. We're not listening to just 1 singular guy who's saying some crap, we're listening to raw data backed by numerous people that have degrees. hum

The typical response

means that you've done this before, gotten similar responses that you are wrong, and so you trudge on with your minority ideal becuase you're correct and everyone else is wrong, even though we've tried telling you that you are wrong, lots of times.
you think there might be some meaning in this?


oh yeah btw you've used a crapload of rhetoric so far, so you've got that nail down.
now er

you havent presented any facts

And here we go again. As I've said, I don't take Alex Jones as seriously as I used to. But he is the only one in the "conspiracy theory" deal that actually have scientist and other proffessionals on his show at times.

How's your opinion so different or better then mine?

luckily, we're not trusting some friend/guy, we're trusting licensed professionals run by governments,

Which is why this world is a sick mess, when we have people only and solely relying on black suits with money, they're always known to tell the truth, however, when you have someone who isn't afraid to speak their mind...they're either a nut or a conspiracy theorist.

I think this is a good meme.

I'm RACIST for criticizing Obama.

TERRORIST because I'm not with Bush.

ANTISEMITIC for not supporting Rothechild Zionism.

TEABAGGER for supporting the Constitution.

TRUTH-ER for asking unanswered questions.

TRAITOR for whistle-blowing on my corrupt Government.

CONSPIRACY THEORIST for presenting documented facts.

TROLL for uploading news, videos, quotes and U.S.Atrocities.

ANTI-AMERICAN for supporting Constitutionalists like Dr. Ron Paul.

RON PAUL 2012!

 

[tysonrss]

Hmm... somehow I saw this thread coming...
Either you're a troll, or you're someone with a very fucked up mind, I don't know which one is worse.

I was surfing the net on the usual politics crap and came upon this

If that's "your research" then I think I'll stick to the research that actually involves testing stuff.

Guess that's what happens when you present logic into an argument.

How is your story even close to logic...?
You're basically saying: Hey everything is a conspiracy, oh and I have youtube videos to prove it.

So I'm a troll for denying hog-wash?

This logic baffles me.

 

[tysonrss]

Then why are you more sceptical of those saying it works than those saying it doesn't? The ones saying it does are medical institutions which go through rigorous testing and scientific procedure; the ones that don't are far more likely to be in it for the money, especially these youtube folk.

Which is kind of the point. The ones who don't normally aren't "in it for money" as that's the other way around.

You can't deny that many Scientist/Nurses or anyhting of the sort happen to be in it just for the sake of it. Whenver you hear people nowadays, they're saying "yeah, I'll make this much, that's the only reason why I'm doing it". This day and age, it's only for the money, and less of helping others. So, they'll say whatever they have to for the profit. It's not rocket science.

 

[Daxis]

Just cause you're not afraid to speak your mind doesn't mean you're right and everyone else is wrong.

CONSPIRACY THEORIST for presenting documented facts.

dude. geez. you haven't presented facts, you've presented rhetorics.

How's your opinion so different or better then mine?

umm....... so did you just admit your entire view is an opinion? what I saidthen anski is totally right then :F
cause well er

The ones saying it does are medical institutions which go through rigorous testing and scientific procedure; the ones that don't are far more likely to be in it for the money, especially these youtube folk.

 

[Ellie]

That's the thing though- you make far more money being a tabloid "scientist", making youtube videos that spark up views (yes you get paid for that), than you do being a doctor or a practicing scientist.

There is a difference between "scientist" and "scientific procedure", it doesn't mean a bloke with a white coat and a PhD said such and such. Scientific procedure actually requires a hell of a lot of work, journal publishings, peer review, testing, retesting,-

I do not doubt that people become doctors or nurses to make money. That's what people do. (But it's not the doctors or nurses that conduct the scientific testing) - I do not doubt people become scientific testers for the money. However "in this day and age" it is highly, highly unlikely, given the amount of peer review, openness of scientific journals, and competition, for something like this to go unanswered.

 

[moog]

this isnt even a discussion anymore, its just "im right, youre wrong and nothing you say can change my mind"

 

[tysonrss]

You can tell if a Youtuber is getting paid to post videos, because it'll have ads.

Anyhow. I don't see how it couldn't. Although, I'm no Scientist, and you aren't either. In any case, I'm just going to end the discussion here, because like the fellow said above, these threads turn out this way. There's never a discussion, only whose right and whose wrong, which buckles down to opinion at the end of the day. I'm quite sure that most us here are not Scientists/Nurses/Doctors, so we shouldn't speak as if we are. I was just wanting to know the opinions of what people thought was all.

 

[Anski]

Then why are you more sceptical of those saying it works than those saying it doesn't? The ones saying it does are medical institutions which go through rigorous testing and scientific procedure; the ones that don't are far more likely to be in it for the money, especially these youtube folk.

Which is kind of the point. The ones who don't normally aren't "in it for money" as that's the other way around.

You can't deny that many Scientist/Nurses or anyhting of the sort happen to be in it just for the sake of it. Whenver you hear people nowadays, they're saying "yeah, I'll make this much, that's the only reason why I'm doing it". This day and age, it's only for the money, and less of helping others. So, they'll say whatever they have to for the profit. It's not rocket science.

Fuck you.

I work in a free clinic when i'm not on call during the weekends, and I don't get paid for it. On top of that, when I am on call, i'm not making 30 dollars an hour, I work in a public hospital and get paid a public wage. The argument that people in the medical profession are in it for the money is one of the most infuriating opinions ever. Until you've worked with all this spectrum of people, you can't even begin to tell who's doing it for whatever reason. My fiancé is in this because she wants to avert cancer, because she had it herself for ten years of her fucking life. We stand up for a goddamn medical oath which if not led will get us fired and our medical licenses revoked. Your generalizing opinion on this is disgusting to me.

 

[tysonrss]

Then why are you more sceptical of those saying it works than those saying it doesn't? The ones saying it does are medical institutions which go through rigorous testing and scientific procedure; the ones that don't are far more likely to be in it for the money, especially these youtube folk.

Which is kind of the point. The ones who don't normally aren't "in it for money" as that's the other way around.

You can't deny that many Scientist/Nurses or anyhting of the sort happen to be in it just for the sake of it. Whenver you hear people nowadays, they're saying "yeah, I'll make this much, that's the only reason why I'm doing it". This day and age, it's only for the money, and less of helping others. So, they'll say whatever they have to for the profit. It's not rocket science.

Fuck you.

I work in a free clinic when i'm not on call during the weekends, and I don't get paid for it. On top of that, when I am on call, i'm not making 30 dollars an hour, I work in a public hospital and get paid a public wage. The argument that people in the medical profession are in it for the money is one of the most infuriating opinions ever. Until you've worked with all this spectrum of people, you can't even begin to tell who's doing it for whatever reason. My fiancé is in this because she wants to avert cancer, because she had it herself for ten years of her fucking life. We stand up for a goddamn medical oath which if not led will get us fired and our medical licenses revoked. Your generalizing opinion on this is disgusting to me.

Good for you. I don't care what your association is. I just said that most, not all. Good for you if you happen to not be apart of the most.

But from what I know, Doctors/Nurses only do the vaccinations, they aren't Scientists, so you're probably only given a paper that says "this is what is in here" and that's it.

This thread isn't about doctors or nurses, it was about Vaccines and the abuse with them carried on by Scientist/Eugenicists.

 

[Anski]

So you're saying this 'corruption' is from the CDCP.

 

[tysonrss]

Who knows? I'm definitely not saying that every Scientist is out to kill or anything, I'm not a fear-mongeror. I'm just pointing out that people need to be more cautious of things, because everything isn't going to be all wishy-washy just because it's some guy in a white coat saying it's good for you. Scientist are next in line to Politicians.

 

[Anski]

Then you don't know what you're talking about if you can't clarify, but instead just jumbo up buzz words like "Politicians" and "Scientist". Where's the proof and the research on YOUR behalf?

 

[tysonrss]

Lol, I come to expect the typical response from a adverse and hostile troll.

Besides, I'm not going to waste my time posting anything, if you're that curious, Google it. Many times, I may post something and it would be over-looked and denied.

Your immature-baiting post, is something I will not lower myself to just to satisfy your ridiculous ego.