Anti-Vax Movement

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Move this thread to Deep Thoughts

  • Yes

    Votes: 6 54.5%
  • No

    Votes: 5 45.5%

  • Total voters
    11
  • Poll closed .
Ever noticed that there's very few actual autistic people in the anti-vaxxer movement?

The reason is simple: Most of my tribe (at least, the ones who know about their disorder and don't use it as an excuse to be a fuck-up) have logically deducted that these people are idiots who would rather have their children die than be autistic.

So, we stay as far away as we can from these people and politely correct anyone who asks about it.
@S-chan used to be involved in the anti-vaxxer movement and she is autistic. Even testified in court with pressure from her parents
 
Autism fear isn't what's driving the current wave of AV, it's just what they hang their hat on to try and get an audience.

There is as much connection between vaccines and autism as there is a hollow Earth filled with Nazis.
 
@S-chan used to be involved in the anti-vaxxer movement and she is autistic. Even testified in court with pressure from her parents
Actually, that's something of a misnomer. I didn't testify in court, rather, my father testified before the Washington state senate using me as an example of the harms thiomersol does to the developing brain in relation to autism, along with the alleged fast recovery of my autism due to prescribed chelation supplements. But the rest is accurate enough, and I was there for the bill signing in 2006.
 
There is as much connection between vaccines and autism as there is a hollow Earth filled with Nazis.

And still the crowd of ignorant buffoons believing in that shit marches on.

A rather dramatic example of the importance of vaccines and herd immunity by be the First Nations peoples and the European settlers (although native decline happened for a lot of reasons, blah blah.)

Although many warring medieval European nation-states likely never grasped the full implications and mechanics behind what they were up to, many of them were engaging in biological warfare long before the United States and USSR were offering to trade anthrax care packages intercontinentally.

Corpses of people who had succumbed to the bubonic plague and other ailments were often lobbed by trebuchets over the walls of kingdoms under siege. Pathogens contained on/in these bodies would do about what you'd expect--exposure to them would often result in illness or death to the exposed, thereby weakening the kingdom in which the body fell. This weakening could bring about or hasten the demise of these targeted lands.

The transit of Europeans into the Americas was similar in this regard. Although they never quite understood the forces at work, the conquistadors' efforts were helped in no small part by the alien bacteria they had imported.
 
Last edited:
As recently as early colonial America, blankets and bedding from smallpox wards were sometimes given to Natives as "peace offerings" with the full intent of spreading the disease to them.

I thought that was a myth that had been debunked?
 
As recently as early colonial America, blankets and bedding from smallpox wards were sometimes given to Natives as "peace offerings" with the full intent of spreading the disease to them.

By the 18th century I'd suspect they had a reasonable understanding of the mechanics at hand, though not on the level we have nowadays. The discovery of the cell in 1665 by Robert Hooke is what I would say likely furthered the what understanding they might have had, but there was still some disconnect regarding pathogens given medical practices up to Pasteur's time.
 
Last edited:
No. Sir Jeffery Amherst was one of the people who did it. They still have the receipts for purchasing the blankets.

"Could it not be contrived to send the small pox among the disaffected tribes of Indians? We must on this occasion use every stratagem in our power to reduce them."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffe...Amherst#Biological_warfare_involving_smallpox

Haha, wow. It's funny. You hear so many people claiming the stories aren't true, eventually you just starts to assume it's like a "1 in 5 are raped" kind of thing.
 
So there is this falsehood that vaccination leads to increased chances of autism.

Granted, the old saying about viral rumors, ""A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." (Mark Twain) is ever appropriate here. But for any myth, legend or tall tale to be a story, there first has to be a kernel of truth to it. Like, for example, the enduring tales of vampires come from rabid human beings.

So my question is, how did vaccination get such an unwarranted reputation if the risks imposed are truly so small? Exaggeration?
 
So my question is, how did vaccination get such an unwarranted reputation if the risks imposed are truly so small? Exaggeration?

It is without doubt partly due to some people simply making shit up--a la Wakefield.

Elsewhere the conspiracy theorists are waiting in the wings, believing anything that is made (effectively) compulsory for the citizenry to accept must always have a sinister ulterior motive to it.

Finally you have the parents of autistic children who do not wish to accept that their genes, age or health might have had something to do with their child's condition. They will look for anything else to palm it off on--and if that means vaccines, so be it.
 
I don't think there is any reason to be ashamed of it but I still think it was far less common than many think

I could see how it might have been common--people not writing about their actions like the one mentioned previously had been or people legitimately not realizing what their actions were to mean to those receiving the blankets.

This is a speculative holding, but I would still call it a logical one. It's possible much has been lost to time.
 
I could see how it might have been common--people not writing about their actions like the one mentioned previously had been or people legitimately not realizing what their actions were to mean to those receiving the blankets.

This is a speculative holding, but I would still call it a logical one. It's possible much has been lost to time.

Either that, or they realised it was a shady tactic and did it without documenting it?
 
Either that, or they realised it was a shady tactic and did it without documenting it?

That's basically what I meant here:

I could see how it might have been common--people not writing about their actions like the one mentioned previously had been or people legitimately not realizing what their actions were to mean to those receiving the blankets.

I should have made this sentence simpler.
 
If you willingly turn your child into a walking biological weapon you are a cock gobbling shitstain period.
 
Back
Top Bottom