Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 135
Like Tree322Likes

Thread: Is Robert De Niro an anti-vaxxer?

  1. #61
    Elite Member NoNoRehab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    LYNWOOD JAIL
    Posts
    3,034

    Default

    Her mindset is wrong, and is very dangerous. There are assholes who argue that being gay is a choice and say there are not two sides of that argument.


    People can believe whatever they want, but to treat idiotic opinions like they're of equal weight with actual, verifiable scientific research is a dangerous, ignorant attitude and results in very real consequences, like the deaths and injury to children (and some adults) caused by the anti-vaxx crowd. Idiots can certainly believe being gay is a choice if they want to, but that doesn't mean everyone has to consider their garbage. Idiots are free to believe that the Holocaust never happened, but that doesn't mean said fuckwits are entitled to "tell their side of the story" every time The Diary of Anne Frank is taught in a classroom or Schindler's List is played. Not every side "deserves to be heard" all the time, because we exist in reality where facts exist, not just opinions, and we also have the reasoning to judge whether certain opinions are based on knowledge and information.

    It's not a opinion that Wakefield's research was found to be "an elaborate fraud." It's not an opinion that his medical license has been revoked. Wakefield told his side and managed to initiate a movement that raised millions of dollars and made him famous - that he was revealed to a fraud is his own fault.
    Millions of dollars and years of time have gone into hundreds of studies to determine there is zero link between autism and vaccines. The only research that "proved" a link between autism and vaccines was Wakefield's, which was a fake. Scientific research is not invalidated because some laymen "have an opinion." Just as there is no actual scientific debate about whether climate change exists, there is no actual scientific debate about vaccines and autism. There is no debate about whether bananas cause brain tumors, either, though I'm sure someone, somewhere, has an opinion like that. The danger is that when those anti-science views, as espoused by the anti-vaxx movement, gain traction with the general public, it results in actual children having been killed and injured by preventable diseases, plus tons of time and money wasted that could otherwise have gone into actual treatment and resources for people with autism.

    Science isn't sexy, and oftentimes, it's not comforting. Telling parents that complicated genetic codes probably resulted in their kid's autism doesn't give them an external Big Bad as a target for their anger. The methods that have been verified to help autism patients are often tough and time intensive, not a secret magic key. Doctors can't offer you a magic pill to fix it. But if you can find an external cause like vaccines/sugar/gluten/whatever the new fad is, you not absolve yourself, but give yourself hope. Now you can be a "warrior mom" like Jenny McCarthy, and just like Jenny, there are tons of mommy bloggers who will tell you that science is bad, all you have to do is find the right diet or magic beans you can "cure" your kid's autism.
    sparkles and Sassiness like this.
    "Don't trust nobody, and 'nobody' meaning Jay Leno in particular." -Chris Rock

  2. #62
    Elite Member sluce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Top Secret Spy for Leann Rimes
    Posts
    37,382

    Default

    fgg and sputnik like this.
    You don't engage with crazies. Because they're, you know, fucking crazy. - WitchCurlGirl

  3. #63
    Elite Member sputnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    fellow traveller
    Posts
    56,161

    Default

    ^^^^
    seriously.


    sluce likes this.
    I'm open to everything. When you start to criticise the times you live in, your time is over. - Karl Lagerfeld

  4. #64
    Elite Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    4,625

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NoNoRehab View Post
    [/COLOR]

    People can believe whatever they want, but to treat idiotic opinions like they're of equal weight with actual, verifiable scientific research is a dangerous, ignorant attitude and results in very real consequences, like the deaths and injury to children (and some adults) caused by the anti-vaxx crowd. Idiots can certainly believe being gay is a choice if they want to, but that doesn't mean everyone has to consider their garbage. Idiots are free to believe that the Holocaust never happened, but that doesn't mean said fuckwits are entitled to "tell their side of the story" every time The Diary of Anne Frank is taught in a classroom or Schindler's List is played. Not every side "deserves to be heard" all the time, because we exist in reality where facts exist, not just opinions, and we also have the reasoning to judge whether certain opinions are based on knowledge and information.

    It's not a opinion that Wakefield's research was found to be "an elaborate fraud." It's not an opinion that his medical license has been revoked. Wakefield told his side and managed to initiate a movement that raised millions of dollars and made him famous - that he was revealed to a fraud is his own fault.
    Millions of dollars and years of time have gone into hundreds of studies to determine there is zero link between autism and vaccines. The only research that "proved" a link between autism and vaccines was Wakefield's, which was a fake. Scientific research is not invalidated because some laymen "have an opinion." Just as there is no actual scientific debate about whether climate change exists, there is no actual scientific debate about vaccines and autism. There is no debate about whether bananas cause brain tumors, either, though I'm sure someone, somewhere, has an opinion like that. The danger is that when those anti-science views, as espoused by the anti-vaxx movement, gain traction with the general public, it results in actual children having been killed and injured by preventable diseases, plus tons of time and money wasted that could otherwise have gone into actual treatment and resources for people with autism.

    Science isn't sexy, and oftentimes, it's not comforting. Telling parents that complicated genetic codes probably resulted in their kid's autism doesn't give them an external Big Bad as a target for their anger. The methods that have been verified to help autism patients are often tough and time intensive, not a secret magic key. Doctors can't offer you a magic pill to fix it. But if you can find an external cause like vaccines/sugar/gluten/whatever the new fad is, you not absolve yourself, but give yourself hope. Now you can be a "warrior mom" like Jenny McCarthy, and just like Jenny, there are tons of mommy bloggers who will tell you that science is bad, all you have to do is find the right diet or magic beans you can "cure" your kid's autism.

    Except when you actually read the vaccine inserts from the manufacturers and it lists SIDS and Autism as a adverse reaction...... (page 11 if you are curious). Oddly enough, this vaccine is no longer on the market.

    http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM101580.pdf
    sluce likes this.

  5. #65
    czb
    czb is offline
    Elite Member czb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    left coast
    Posts
    16,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by happy8 View Post
    Except when you actually read the vaccine inserts from the manufacturers and it lists SIDS and Autism as a adverse reaction...... (page 11 if you are curious). Oddly enough, this vaccine is no longer on the market.

    http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM101580.pdf
    per the FDA, the drug company has to list all the adverse reactions that occurred during the trial, regardless of whether or not they were attributed to the vaccine or drug. so if a patient said they stubbed their toe, their hair turned blue, or they stopped having sex, all those adverse events would be recorded.

  6. #66
    Silver Member sparkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NoNoRehab View Post
    [/COLOR]

    People can believe whatever they want, but to treat idiotic opinions like they're of equal weight with actual, verifiable scientific research is a dangerous, ignorant attitude and results in very real consequences, like the deaths and injury to children (and some adults) caused by the anti-vaxx crowd. Idiots can certainly believe being gay is a choice if they want to, but that doesn't mean everyone has to consider their garbage. Idiots are free to believe that the Holocaust never happened, but that doesn't mean said fuckwits are entitled to "tell their side of the story" every time The Diary of Anne Frank is taught in a classroom or Schindler's List is played. Not every side "deserves to be heard" all the time, because we exist in reality where facts exist, not just opinions, and we also have the reasoning to judge whether certain opinions are based on knowledge and information.

    It's not a opinion that Wakefield's research was found to be "an elaborate fraud." It's not an opinion that his medical license has been revoked. Wakefield told his side and managed to initiate a movement that raised millions of dollars and made him famous - that he was revealed to a fraud is his own fault.
    Millions of dollars and years of time have gone into hundreds of studies to determine there is zero link between autism and vaccines. The only research that "proved" a link between autism and vaccines was Wakefield's, which was a fake. Scientific research is not invalidated because some laymen "have an opinion." Just as there is no actual scientific debate about whether climate change exists, there is no actual scientific debate about vaccines and autism. There is no debate about whether bananas cause brain tumors, either, though I'm sure someone, somewhere, has an opinion like that. The danger is that when those anti-science views, as espoused by the anti-vaxx movement, gain traction with the general public, it results in actual children having been killed and injured by preventable diseases, plus tons of time and money wasted that could otherwise have gone into actual treatment and resources for people with autism.

    Science isn't sexy, and oftentimes, it's not comforting. Telling parents that complicated genetic codes probably resulted in their kid's autism doesn't give them an external Big Bad as a target for their anger. The methods that have been verified to help autism patients are often tough and time intensive, not a secret magic key. Doctors can't offer you a magic pill to fix it. But if you can find an external cause like vaccines/sugar/gluten/whatever the new fad is, you not absolve yourself, but give yourself hope. Now you can be a "warrior mom" like Jenny McCarthy, and just like Jenny, there are tons of mommy bloggers who will tell you that science is bad, all you have to do is find the right diet or magic beans you can "cure" your kid's autism.
    I also believe that there are not two sides to every issue. There just aren't. As you mentioned, the Holocaust happened, all the facts prove that it did, and there just is not any room to debate that.
    Just as there is no longer any room to debate the fact that the world is round. It is and that's a fact. When the truth to something is absolute how can it be argued reasonably that there is another side to present? Perhaps I am being obtuse, but I don't understand why this upsets anyone. People can claim whatever the hell they want, but is it a legitimate alternative viewpoint? I don't believe so.

    I also think you are dead on about parents wanting something to blame when it comes to a child's illness or disability. Shortly after I began to suspect my son's autism, I started to read everything I could get my hands on about autism. .On many of the forumsI saw parents so full of rage and despair and completely understood where those feelings came from. People like Jenny McCarthy fed this anger and it was exceptionally sad and, as it turns out, very dangerous.But I could also see that the proof of vaccines causing autism just wasn't there. I also knew that there was more than one child on my husband's side of the family with problems on the autism spectrum. To deny the strong possibility that there wasn't a genetic link in our son's case would have been foolish and certainly nothing more than wishful thinking on my part.

  7. #67
    Elite Member sluce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Top Secret Spy for Leann Rimes
    Posts
    37,382

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sparkles View Post
    I also believe that there are not two sides to every issue. There just aren't. As you mentioned, the Holocaust happened, all the facts prove that it did, and there just is not any room to debate that.

    Just as there is no longer any room to debate the fact that the world is round. It is and that's a fact. When the truth to something is absolute how can it be argued reasonably that there is another side to present? Perhaps I am being obtuse, but I don't understand why this upsets anyone. People can claim whatever the hell they want, but is it a legitimate alternative viewpoint? I don't believe so.

    I also think you are dead on about parents wanting something to blame when it comes to a child's illness or disability. Shortly after I began to suspect my son's autism, I started to read everything I could get my hands on about autism. .On many of the forumsI saw parents so full of rage and despair and completely understood where those feelings came from. People like Jenny McCarthy fed this anger and it was exceptionally sad and, as it turns out, very dangerous.But I could also see that the proof of vaccines causing autism just wasn't there. I also knew that there was more than one child on my husband's side of the family with problems on the autism spectrum. To deny the strong possibility that there wasn't a genetic link in our son's case would have been foolish and certainly nothing more than wishful thinking on my part.
    I am sorry you have had to deal with this personally, but the example of the Holocaust and earth being flat do not fit. There are still two sides to those cases though - even when one side has been proven wrong. There are always different sides and opinions - there JUST ARE. Proving one wrong doesn't make it go away. The people who choose to believe differently still are entitled to their opinions and to share them.

    I do not wish to continue the argument because people who don't agree are never going to agree. I will never agree with silencing dissenting opinions. If we had, we would still believe the earth is flat and never set sail...
    Last edited by sluce; March 29th, 2016 at 04:58 PM.
    sputnik, NickiDrea and lindsaywhit like this.
    You don't engage with crazies. Because they're, you know, fucking crazy. - WitchCurlGirl

  8. #68
    Silver Member sparkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sluce View Post
    I am sorry you have had to deal with this personally, but the example of the Holocaust and earth being flat do not fit. There are still two sides to those cases though - one side was proven wrong. There are always different sides and opinions - there JUST ARE. Proving one wrong doesn't make it go away. The people who choose to believe differently still are entitled to their opinions and to share them.
    Sluce, I do believe that they are similar in nature. Having said that, I absolutely agree that people are entitled to their opinions (whatever they are) and I also believe that they are entitled to express them. But it (to me anyway) is not the same as another potentially legitimate take on an issue. It could be that my understanding of the phrase "two sides to an argument" means something more specific to me-rightly or wrongly. Perhaps our disagreement comes down to nothing more than semantics.
    sluce likes this.

  9. #69
    Elite Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    4,625

    Default

    There is always two sides to an argument whether or not you want to acknowledge it is your prerogative. I choose to look at all sides of an issue before making a decision. This is an area where people agree to disagree. However, when whistleblowers show evidence that makes you go hmmm... you best pay attention. Here's an excerpt from a CDC employee admitting to omitting data in regards to the whistleblower case being heard in court right now. The information is out there for people that actually want to read both sides of the issue, not just believe what you hear on the news.

    http://morganverkamp.com/statement-of-william-w-thompson-ph-d-regarding-the-2004-article-examining-the-possibility-of-a-relationship-between-mmr-vaccine-and-autism/

  10. #70
    Elite Member NickiDrea's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,497

    Default

    My own personal theory, having recently graduated from Google U, is that autism is caused by a combination of genetics, parental age, and phthalates, which are in everything (though not vaccines) and cause a multitude of enviromental and health problems.
    That is my conclusion as well. My son has autism, his twin sister does not. I think it's caused by genetics and that sometimes it also just *happens*, I have explained it to my son as his brain just being a little different. I was only 28 and my husband was 31 when I had the twins so I don't think my age was a factor, but who knows.

    I agree that there are two sides to every story and if people want to believe a discredited doctor that's their right to do so. And by all means, make a ridiculous and inaccurate documentary about that doctor and bad medicine if you want to. I just don't think you have the right for your documentary to be showcased at a private movie festival.
    sluce likes this.
    "Thankfully I'm an educated multi-millionaire who knows better than to speak to perverted unjust cops without my lawyer. "
    "I think she's psychotic...what do I do?" - Jenny Schecter

  11. #71
    Elite Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    3,140

    Default

    ^^Yeah, I didn't mean that all three factors are always present, just that a certain combination of genes will cause autism, and that certain enviromental factors can increase the risk.

    Another conversation, that De Niro could have facilitated is, what is a "normal" brain, and how can society be better at accomodating those who fall outside the narrow margins of normalcy.

  12. #72
    Elite Member CornFlakegrl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Hanging with the raisin girls
    Posts
    14,709

    Default

    Was anyone in here actually saying that Deniro was required to show the movie?

    I think the "censorship" issue was meant for those who want the movie suppressed, not the committee making a legit choice not to run it.
    sluce likes this.
    if you're so incensed that you can't fly your penis in public take it up with your state, arrange a nude protest, go and be the rosa parks of cocks or something - witchcurlgirl

  13. #73
    Elite Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CornFlakegrl View Post
    Was anyone in here actually saying that Deniro was required to show the movie?

    I think the "censorship" issue was meant for those who want the movie suppressed, not the committee making a legit choice not to run it.
    No, not at all. This all started because we were talking about DeNiro's comments about starting a conversation about vaccines and autism and how a movie like this, that perpetuates falsehoods, will be taken as gospel by some because it is a documentary and people don't tend to look at both sides of an issue when it promoted as the "truth" of something. Then, the conversations about censorship and whether or not there are really two sides to any issue began.
    lindsaywhit and sluce like this.

  14. #74
    czb
    czb is offline
    Elite Member czb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    left coast
    Posts
    16,380

    Default

    i thought thompson's testimony was thrown out a while ago:

    Forbes Welcome

    i know coleen boyle and destefano, they are hardly shlock....

  15. #75
    Elite Member Annika's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,864

    Default

    i'm not an anti-vaxxer but i do think kids are getting too many vaccines these days (more than we used to when we were young). i'm all for vacation vaccines, but i'd never get a flu shot. i'd give my kid whooping cough and measles, mumps, rubella, but not the gardisil vaccine. well she could get it when she turned 18 if she wanted.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. State Farm Inoculates Itself From Anti-Vaxxer Rob Schneider
    By witchcurlgirl in forum Latest Gossip
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: September 28th, 2014, 04:36 PM
  2. Robert De Niro Opens Up About His Gay Father
    By sluce in forum Latest Gossip
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: May 28th, 2014, 09:21 AM
  3. Lamb answers Robert De Niro
    By Honey in forum Pets and Animals
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 6th, 2012, 07:48 PM
  4. Robert De Niro: filming is fun
    By word in forum Latest Gossip
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: November 7th, 2009, 01:52 PM
  5. Robert De Niro [Actor]
    By muchlove in forum Hot Guys
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: June 18th, 2006, 05:53 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •