CA has mandatory vaccination/CA Bans Personal Belief Exemp

[DowntownAbbey]

I think if we were calling it civil unions some people may have less of a problem than calling it marriage.

Are you talking civil unions instead of just same-sex marriage or civil unions instead of marriage period?

[OkToBeTakei]

You do realise they are two separate things right? Right?

[Snarkylark]

I don't see it. Snarky lark keeps excusing or changing her previous opinions. I think FG is trying to unravel what admittedly is a lot of word salad. The main issue being the link she posted then admitted she did not read.

What it comes down to is that I think all intelligent people can understand that like any medication vaccines can and do have side effects and people can react differently. That may include all vaccines or in your case you suspect one vaccine.

What to me the problem is, people and worse somebody who is trying to lend further gravitas by claiming to be a health professional then uses this information to make blanket statements. Sure it's the internet she's probably a shit hot hairdresser for all I know.

Some of the crap she is spouting is not just the words of somebody who is not that bright but by 'claiming' to be a nurse she is trying 'influence.' That's really shitty online or not.

It has as other have pointed out ruined an extremely interesting thread. The moment anybody voices any kind of anecdotal story or opinion snarky lark jumps on the 'see I told you so' train and it is just plain unhelpful.

please tell me where I said "see I told you so?"

Also, I did not bring up the fact that I'm a nurse in this thread to try to back up my opinion in this thread to try to influence. Someone remembered that I was from a previous post and entered it into the discussion. No one would know if that person didn't bring it up because I never said "I'm a nurse so I know what I'm talking about so you shouldn't get vaccines...." And I've already said I posted one link from a website and admitted I did not read the WHOLE WEBSITE or EVERYTHING on it. I didn't know that that was a requirement. Smh

[Snarkylark]

Are you talking civil unions instead of just same-sex marriage or civil unions instead of marriage period?

I think there are people who don't like same sex marriages being called marriage and if they were called civil unions it may be more acceptable to those people.

I'm still not clear as to why it matters what I think about it?

[OkToBeTakei]

please tell me where I said "see I told you so?"

Also, I did not bring up the fact that I'm a nurse in this thread to try to back up my opinion in this thread to try to influence. Someone remembered that I was from a previous post and entered it into the discussion. No one would know if that person didn't bring it up because I never said "I'm a nurse so I know what I'm talking about so you shouldn't get vaccines...." And I've already said I posted one link from a website and admitted I did not read the WHOLE WEBSITE or EVERYTHING on it. I didn't know that that was a requirement. Smh

Not a requirement but if you expect people to read something you have linked it would seem wise not to mention intelligent to read it yourself first.

You posted your qualifications and results if memory serves but obviously that is for no other reason than??? Maybe because posters have a very hard time believing it or maybe a tad concerned that you ARE in fact a nurse.

I don't know why I'm bothering to explain as you appear to have comprehension issues. I said 'I told you so' TRAIN.

This a broad description of your posts.

[OkToBeTakei]

I think there are people who don't like same sex marriages being called marriage and if they were called civil unions it may be more acceptable to those people.

I'm still not clear as to why it matters what I think about it?

When people say 'there are people' on being asked their own opinion, what follows is their own opinion.

Why should gay marriage be called something else to (you) these 'other people' you speak for and on their behalf.

Also a civil union is not marriage. I realise now you don't know this.

Snarky lark earlier in the thread I tried to sincerely give you hints about this forum which you ignored so I will try again.

Although as can be evidenced in this thread not everybody has the same opinion on every or any issue there is one constant and that is FJ exists to snark on fundamental religion and beliefs.

Common to fundamental beliefs not all but certainly ones which commonly concern and attract comment and snark on FJ are child rearing such as Ezzo, Pearl and various incarnations. Their beliefs on abortion and liking it to the holocaust or Nazis. Their belief that gay marriage should not exist. Anti- vax. Sex before marriage is evil and purity for the win. There are others but I'll just leave it at that.

So yes your beliefs political personal and religious may well be questioned, especially when your opinions appear to align with those we snark on.

[Snarkylark]

Not a requirement but if you expect people to read something you have linked it would seem wise not to mention intelligent to read it yourself first.

You posted your qualifications and results if memory serves but obviously that is for no other reason than??? Maybe because posters have a very hard time believing it or maybe a tad concerned that you ARE in fact a nurse.

I don't know why I'm bothering to explain as you appear to have comprehension issues. I said 'I told you so' TRAIN.

This a broad description of your posts.

I think the comprehension issues apply to you as you can't realize that I did not bring up the fact that I'm a nurse. Someone else did. I don't have comprehension issues. I don't like my words twisted.

[OkToBeTakei]

If you think I'm going to post my credentials online on a public forum then you are as crazy as you think I am;)

I will tell you I got A's in all my courses but two (B's) made the Dean's list, graduated with honors, and passed the NCLEX with the minimum of 75 questions, while taking care of my four children. I don't care if you don't believe me. That doesn't take away my education or accomplishments. FTR, my children are fully vaccinated, except for Hep B, the flu shot, or gardasil. But I reserve the right to make a CHOICE!

You claimed to be a nurse on a previous thread the one where you did pretty much the same as you are doing here..... Posting some questionable opinions being questioned on them then spending pages upon pages of 'explanation.'

I am not twisting your words, when nelliebellie posted the above , that you 'claimed' to be a nurse you posted your qualifications (alleged) Now if your reading comprehension is intact as you claim you will recall I mentioned the fact that it was concerning that posters might try to lend more gravitas to their opinions by such claims. If you were indeed not trying to do this to influence other's readings of your posts then there really was no need to mention the above at all. I dunno maybe your just a fanny who likes to boast, that's possible too.

[Mama Mia]

Although as can be evidenced in this thread not everybody has the same opinion on every or any issue there is one constant and that is FJ exists to snark on fundamental religion and beliefs.

Common to fundamental beliefs not all but certainly ones which commonly concern and attract comment and snark on FJ are child rearing such as Ezzo, Pearl and various incarnations. Their beliefs on abortion and liking it to the holocaust or Nazis. Their belief that gay marriage should not exist. Anti- vax. Sex before marriage is evil and purity for the win. There are others but I'll just leave it at that.

So yes your beliefs political personal and religious may well be questioned, especially when your opinions appear to align with those we snark on.

That's so interesting that anti- vax is lumped in there. I assume there must be a few fundamentalists where I live - because they are everywhere -- but it's a really small proportion of the population. But we have an incredibly low vaccination rate overall. As I said in an earlier post, it is in the 60 - 80% range at a fair number of elementary schools. And under 50% at some charter and ( expensive ) private schools. I would assume most of these are people who have mostly vaccinated, but skipped some they had issues with ( but it would only reflect immunizations required for small children ) . There are a metric ton of super crunchy hippie types. But some of the schools with the lowest immunization rates are very wealthy, with most of the parents having professional jobs ( my daughter is a teacher at the school that has both the wealthiest parents and the lowest immunization rates) . The parents are mostly very educated and work in professional fields ( well the fathers, the mothers at school functions look like escapees from a real housewives set ) .

It always surprises me on FJ because all the general socially progressive tick boxes are generally there ( with individual variation of course ) -- but when it comes to large corporations / food sources / pharmeucetical companies / non- western medicine -- the prevailing view is more what I would expect from social conservatives. It's just always surprising, not neccessarily good or bad -- just....different. I'm not saying most people I know are anti- vax - but it's definitely a fair number in the area. On the other hand, many of those same people who do fit in all the other socially progressive categories in my RL do some sort of " sleep training " ....people just don't fit in the damn boxes I want to put them in ! :doh:

[OkToBeTakei]

That's so interesting that anti- vax is lumped in there. I assume there must be a few fundamentalists where I live - because they are everywhere -- but it's a really small proportion of the population. But we have an incredibly low vaccination rate overall. As I said in an earlier post, it is in the 60 - 80% range at a fair number of elementary schools. And under 50% at some charter and ( expensive ) private schools. I would assume most of these are people who have mostly vaccinated, but skipped some they had issues with ( but it would only reflect immunizations required for small children ) . There are a metric ton of super crunchy hippie types. But some of the schools with the lowest immunization rates are very wealthy, with most of the parents having professional jobs ( my daughter is a teacher at the school that has both the wealthiest parents and the lowest immunization rates) . The parents are mostly very educated and work in professional fields ( well the fathers, the mothers at school functions look like escapees from a real housewives set ) .

It always surprises me on FJ because all the general socially progressive tick boxes are generally there ( with individual variation of course ) -- but when it comes to large corporations / food sources / pharmeucetical companies / non- western medicine -- the prevailing view is more what I would expect from social conservatives. It's just always surprising, not neccessarily good or bad -- just....different. I'm not saying most people I know are anti- vax - but it's definitely a fair number in the area. On the other hand, many of those same people who do fit in all the other socially progressive categories in my RL do some sort of " sleep training " ....people just don't fit in the damn boxes I want to put them in ! :doh:

:lol: I know! I was trying not box things up whilst boxing them!! It's also hard to box up FJ and I'm aware it's not a group think ...... Far from it. Fundies also don't really fit a catch all I was trying to generalise with on my mind say, Lori the Monster, Zsu, Kelly 2 chickens and the Duggars. Whilst they do not all subscribe to all the same beliefs there is most definitely a constant. I don't or didn't think ant-vax was necessarily a Fundie belief per se, then realised it crops up quite frequently with this demographic. I think it is also common in other demographics like you said, crunchie, or just the type who are anti anything society says.

I was trying to make generalisations but Snarky lark appears to be a concrete thinker who does not appear to understand this, she appears to take posts and concepts very literally! I thought by spelling it out it may help. Maybe she is not aware that posting a list of your qualifications in response to doubt about her being a nurse might not be saying 'I am a nurse' well duh...... Maybe she is being deliberately obtuse. It's like a child saying ... But I did not say the actual words niener niener! I digress, it's just annoying when people dance around their words versus intent.

I know somebody else expressed surprise about the socially progressive big pharma subject recently saying the same as yourself..... Maggie maybe. I'm not particularly informed ...... Socialised healthcare presents different issues. For another day.

Socially progressive though, yes. As we all know not everybody has the same opinions and absolutely have the right to voice them and unfortunately in life at times do!!!! I just wonder if this is the environment snarky lark is looking for. Or if she took the time to look about. She seems to express surprise at the way she is responded to , so I'm thinking not. I would expect her to be less surprised if she genuinely is here to debate these issues and knew her audience might differ. I mean Ezzo ffs! Also asking why her religious, political views were relevant. :lol:

I was trying to wrap my head around it and throw her a line. I suspect it may be pointless but you never know?

[bekahdimples]

This is where you get into the slippery slope argument that worries people.

For one -- the vast majority of people who contract HPV have no long term problems and don't contract cervical cancer. In fact, most of the time HPV leaves the body on its own, much like other viruses.

There is also the question of long term side effects from Gardasil. It can be very difficult to prove a direct cause , or an accurate number ---but that doesn't really help the young women who may have been impacted. Even the Gardasil manufacturers site acknowledges that things like muscle aches, joint pain, fatigue, feeling just generally un- well , should be reported - even months later. The big problems are that 1) very few people are going to go the FDA site and make reports because they don't make the connection - and don't even know about the site. And 2) even if they do report, there's no way to know for sure if that was the cause, or a trigger, or not even related.

People also tend to be very dismissive of that type of side effect. However if they lived very day with those sorts of issues, they likely would take it more seriously. As I said in an earlier post -- one of my daughters has had these issues since around the time she got her Gardasil vaccine. It does make her life more difficult. She's now a working mom of young kids - so tired goes with the territory. But being chronically run down and aching makes it much harder. I have no real idea if it was the Gardasil - but I also don't have any other likely explanations.

Also, with HPV, a mandatory vaccine is definitely moving out of the territory of protecting the general public or herd immunity or any of that.

So I receivedall gardasil.

Later got HPV ( I know it doesn't cover all types)

Body took care of on its own

I recently read a study that said gardasil users were more likely to contract different strains of HPV than women who did not get shots.

:/

[nelliebelle1197]

The whole issue with this thread is that a certain poster really has no idea how to argue. Her point cannot be made from a medical perspective because the issue of mandatory vaccinations, while a public health issue, is essentially a philosophical, legal and ethical issue that should be argued from a perspective of fundamental human rights. I would take it from Rousseau's expression of the correlation between freedom and authority. That idea is foundational in modern political thought and governance and really is the well from which this discussion should have sprung.

[FundieFarmer]

I think the comprehension issues apply to you as you can't realize that I did not bring up the fact that I'm a nurse. Someone else did. I don't have comprehension issues. I don't like my words twisted.

Okay so, I've already said this, but you didn't respond to that post, so I'm going to say it again.

It doesn't matter where you said it.

You told us you're a nurse.

Regardless of what thread it was in, people remember it.

So when you start dispensing healthcare opinions, people are going to bring it up.

If you don't want someone to bring something up in one thread that you said in another thread, don't say it at all.

Sorry, but that's how it works around here.

So for Pete's sake, please stop wailing about this and taking up post after post to tell us you didn't originally say it here. We know. But you said it elsewhere, so here it is. As my sister always said, if you're man enough to go streaking, you're man enough to have everybody talking about it.

[DowntownAbbey]

I think there are people who don't like same sex marriages being called marriage and if they were called civil unions it may be more acceptable to those people.

I'm still not clear as to why it matters what I think about it?

It doesn't really "matter" so much as I (and possibly the other users that asked about it) wanted clarification/more information. For the record, you delved into the same-sex marriage issue from formergothardite's comparison of your arguments to non sequitur arguments against same-sex marriage.

Lol, I'm glad you brought that up! Polygamists are looking to have their marriages recognized now too. And pedophiles are looking to have their "attraction" recognized as something they are born with. I understand that pedophiles prey on children and there is the consent issue there. But what age is able to give "consent" in UT for example. We know that FLDS children as young as 12 have been married off.

Thread drift is outrageously common on FJ. You yourself contributed to the drift. By the time I caught up with the posts earlier, I read your post and wanted more clarification on your position. No big reason on why it "matters." It doesn't affect how I view your posts on mandatory vaccination.

[Snarkylark]

Okay so, I've already said this, but you didn't respond to that post, so I'm going to say it again.

It doesn't matter where you said it.

You told us you're a nurse.

Regardless of what thread it was in, people remember it.

So when you start dispensing healthcare opinions, people are going to bring it up.

If you don't want someone to bring something up in one thread that you said in another thread, don't say it at all.

Sorry, but that's how it works around here.

So for Pete's sake, please stop wailing about this and taking up post after post to tell us you didn't originally say it here. We know. But you said it elsewhere, so here it is. As my sister always said, if you're man enough to go streaking, you're man enough to have everybody talking about it.

I totally get that. I really do. I don't have a problem with people knowing it or bringing up or I wouldn't have mentioned it. But I objected to it being used against me by another poster saying that I brought it up in THIS thread to try to dissuade people from getting vaccines or as a way of trying to gain credibility. True, nurses may have more medical or health knowledge than the general public. That doesn't make us experts on anything. We have to know a little about a lot. I enjoy the discussion and I appreciate learning from other people's points of view (or I wouldn't be here.) I've tried to remain respectful, I just ask the same in return. I found this site years ago mainly because of my feelings about the Duggars. Like most of you I knew something was "up" with them and they aren't what they seemed. I like the forum format but I just lurked here for a long time. I never explored other sections here until the now infamous Ezzo post brought me over to this section;) I listened to the PFP series almost 20 years ago. Can you imagine why I don't remember much of it? I obviously immediately threw away the junk that I didn't agree with never to be thought about again.

[Mama Mia]

I totally get that. I really do. I don't have a problem with people knowing it or bringing up or I wouldn't have mentioned it. But I objected to it being used against me by another poster saying that I brought it up in THIS thread to try to dissuade people from getting vaccines or as a way of trying to gain credibility. True, nurses may have more medical or health knowledge than the general public. That doesn't make us experts on anything. We have to know a little about a lot. I enjoy the discussion and I appreciate learning from other people's points of view (or I wouldn't be here.) I've tried to remain respectful, I just ask the same in return. I found this site years ago mainly because of my feelings about the Duggars. Like most of you I knew something was "up" with them and they aren't what they seemed. I like the forum format but I just lurked here for a long time. I never explored other sections here until the now infamous Ezzo post brought me over to this section;) I listened to the PFP series almost 20 years ago. Can you imagine why I don't remember much of it? I obviously immediately threw away the junk that I didn't agree with never to be thought about again.

I completely understand that, and I also really " get" becoming super defensive and doubling down if I feel like I'm being attacked -- especially about anything regarding my parenting choices. It brings out the snarling tiger in me, that's for sure.

But , and I'm saying this seriously and respectfully -- take it for what it's worth -- advice from a stranger on the Internet -- I really think on that thread you rubbed people the wrong way because instead of just realizing that you didn't really remember the Ezzo stuff accurately , and saying something like " wow, I didn't realize he said all that! Ithats horrible! must have grabbed the couple of good ideas and completely misremebered the rest!" -- you kept defending him. Yes, you added in that you kept what worked and discarded the bad -- but you came across as basically defending a completely different parenting style and attributing it to Ezzo. Which can get really annoying. I know it's hard to back down once you've dug in, but it does make it much easier to have a conversation. Because most of what you kept defending on that thread were really basic common sense things most people would agree with. More structured than worked for me, but not totally unreasonable -- and not at all what Ezzo advocates.

I think this thread has been kind of similar. If someone disagrees with you and you think it's because they misunderstood your point -- instead of rephrasing it , it seems, to me, that first you get really defensive ( again, really easy to do if you're feeling piled on in a thread ) -- and then throw in some extra controversial/ inflammatory remark, and THEN try to rephrase it. So the people you are debating are already getting worked up about the latest explosive statement and don't catch your rephrasing/ explanation. Does that make sense?

Sorry if that sounds condescending. It's truly not meant to.

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

Overheard today at the pool from a woman sitting two chairs down... One of her friend's daughter was paralyzed form her gardasil vax. I don't know if it's Guillain Barre or permanent:(

Overheard at the pool doesn't mean anything. I've heard a parent claim that if her kid didn't get at least two servings of kefir a day, her kids were going to have digestive problems for weeks; and her naturopathic doctor was afraid that digestive problems would set back all the good they've done trying to prevent autism from developing later in life.

Furthermore, if you go to the page Things Anti-vaxers Say on facebook, you'll see thousands of examples of things parents blame on vaccines (not just "vaccine injuries" of their own kids, but complete and total strangers). None of those claims actually holds any weight, either.

[Snarkylark]

I completely understand that, and I also really " get" becoming super defensive and doubling down if I feel like I'm being attacked -- especially about anything regarding my parenting choices. It brings out the snarling tiger in me, that's for sure.

But , and I'm saying this seriously and respectfully -- take it for what it's worth -- advice from a stranger on the Internet -- I really think on that thread you rubbed people the wrong way because instead of just realizing that you didn't really remember the Ezzo stuff accurately , and saying something like " wow, I didn't realize he said all that! Ithats horrible! must have grabbed the couple of good ideas and completely misremebered the rest!" -- you kept defending him. Yes, you added in that you kept what worked and discarded the bad -- but you came across as basically defending a completely different parenting style and attributing it to Ezzo. Which can get really annoying. I know it's hard to back down once you've dug in, but it does make it much easier to have a conversation. Because most of what you kept defending on that thread were really basic common sense things most people would agree with. More structured than worked for me, but not totally unreasonable -- and not at all what Ezzo advocates.

I think this thread has been kind of similar. If someone disagrees with you and you think it's because they misunderstood your point -- instead of rephrasing it , it seems, to me, that first you get really defensive ( again, really easy to do if you're feeling piled on in a thread ) -- and then throw in some extra controversial/ inflammatory remark, and THEN try to rephrase it. So the people you are debating are already getting worked up about the latest explosive statement and don't catch your rephrasing/ explanation. Does that make sense?

Sorry if that sounds condescending. It's truly not meant to.

Yes, I understand.

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

I guess a better question would be, do you believe that an unvaccinated person has never spread a disease to others?

I'm asking because this quote of yours seems to imply that it is all hypothetical and that no one has ever been hurt by a family choosing to not vaccinate

Well sure, people "could" be harmed by someone choosing not to vaccinate. But that's hypothetical

It isn't hypothetical. I personally know of one case where there were very long lasting problems harm by a family choosing to not vaccinate their children, missing the warning signs of a vaccine preventable disease and then spreading it about. There are plenty of other cases too.

I can completely attest to it not being hypothetical.

My grandfather's mother was anti-vaccination and a pro-disease back in the 40s and 50s. Before the age of 5, my grandfather caught almost every vaccine preventable childhood disease. Either when he had the measles or rubella (I cant remember which right now, and I don't have his baby book on hand to check), it was so hard on his body that he ended up having a heart attack at the age of 3. They were very lucky he didn't die, like many people throughout history who have contracted the disease. Because of that heart attack, he has had a lifetime of heart problems. Now, at the age of 79, his heart is having such problems that they have to keep draining his lungs of fluid and they're talking about putting in a pace maker if they cant find a medication that will fix the problems.

My grandfather was lucky he didn't die. He was lucky he didn't have any damage done to anything other than his heart during any of the diseases he contracted. He was lucky that he got to live his life and do what he enjoyed doing. Others who caught those diseases were not so lucky.

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

You should break links to blogs. Remove http://, https://, and/or www. or you can use donotlink.

The author has an M.D degree (1998), but has not worked as a doctor ever. He has an M.S. in Science Education (not Immunology) - degree with no published paper. FYI, this is not a great science degree if there is no peer reviewed paper published. He is a teacher and a writer, for the blog it seems, because I can't find any journal articles.

He gives his opinion at first (see no links to peer reviewed articles) and then when he talks about the link between immune system and AI disorders he has links to articles (well, one link is science daily, but it is on a scientific study).

His conclusion is that if you have AI, you can get vaccines. Is that the conclusion you want me to see, or something else? I feel that a person and their doctor should evaluate their health in regards to vaccines, and specific people have talked about not having a vaccine after their doctor told them they shouldn't. No one seems to be saying all people ever with AI disorders should not get vaccinated.

I am again confused to your point.

Re the bolded: this is why I refuse to listen to or support anything "Doctor Oz" says. The man was a teacher of surgery of the heart and lungs. He never worked as a surgeon, or in any of the fields he claims to have knowledge about (particularly sex health and nutritional health). The man is a quack, regardless of the fact that he gets to call himself a doctor because he has a doctorate degree necessary for his teaching job.

[Walking Cat Bed]

I guess I assumed it was implied but clearly I need to spell things out so that I'm not misunderstood. The whole "internet and tone" thing, you know?

This isn't a case of misreading tone. This is a case of you repeatedly posting of information or making comments and then denying that you said/meant/implied the conclusions drawn by others.

[FundieFarmer]

I totally get that. I really do. I don't have a problem with people knowing it or bringing up or I wouldn't have mentioned it. But I objected to it being used against me by another poster saying that I brought it up in THIS thread to try to dissuade people from getting vaccines or as a way of trying to gain credibility. True, nurses may have more medical or health knowledge than the general public. That doesn't make us experts on anything. We have to know a little about a lot. I enjoy the discussion and I appreciate learning from other people's points of view (or I wouldn't be here.) I've tried to remain respectful, I just ask the same in return. I found this site years ago mainly because of my feelings about the Duggars. Like most of you I knew something was "up" with them and they aren't what they seemed. I like the forum format but I just lurked here for a long time. I never explored other sections here until the now infamous Ezzo post brought me over to this section;) I listened to the PFP series almost 20 years ago. Can you imagine why I don't remember much of it? I obviously immediately threw away the junk that I didn't agree with never to be thought about again.

It's annoying to feel you've had words put in your mouth. However, I don't think you're so upset about someone saying that YOU said you're a nurse as you are that it's being "used against you" at all. That makes sense given that a lot of people on the thread disagree with you, and some are concerned you're a nurse if that's your opinion. I don't know what you're saying on be Ezzo side so I can't speak to that, but my point is that whatever you say will be dragged around the forum. You'll probably have posters say "Aren't you the one who __________?" on other threads in the future, just like everybody else has. It's not a big deal, but I'm saying it doesn't matter who brought it up because if you said it, it's fair game.

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

I wonder if anti-vaxers have their pets vaccinated against rabies? If so, why would they vaccinate their pets but not their kids? For the record, I am very much pro-vax, get a flu shot every year per my doctor's advice, and take the feline headship to the vet for his vaccines.

Oh, and when an idiot anti-vaxer's rights interferes with my rights, we're gonna have a problem. This debate nothing to do with parental rights. It has to do with people who think they and their uneducated preachers, church friends, and mommy groups are smarter than medical professionals. NEWSFLASH: YOU AIN'T AND THEY AIN'T! GET OVER YOURSELVES YOU FUCIKING FOOLS! TAKE YOUR PSEUDO SCIENCE AND STICK IT WHERE THE SUN DON'T SHINE!

This is the only post I'll make in this thread.

There have been quite a few cases on Things Anti-Vaxers Say about people trying to detox their dogs after they were forced to immunize them. But many more claiming that rabies isn't a threat and, therefore, they don't vaccinate their animals. Many even speak against vaccinating against parvo. What kind of monster would be okay with putting a dog at risk of parvo? I've had to put down a puppy who was too young to be vaccinated against parvo because someone knew that I rescued dogs and just threw their dog (who had been exposed to parvo) into my back yard when I wasn't home. We were lucky in the sense that only one of the puppies got parvo, but watching him suffer so much was so painful. And, to hear that this puppy, whom I had hand raised since birth, had a 5-10% chance of survival (largely due to his size and age) even with all the best medications and round the clock care from the animal hospital? I can't even describe how horrible, helpless, and hopeless I felt.

[FundieFarmer]

Hi from a fellow rescuer, DuggarsTheEndIsNear! That's horrible, what a loss that was for you. I'm really sorry. What an incredibly stupid thing for that person to have done.

[OkToBeTakei]

I totally get that. I really do. I don't have a problem with people knowing it or bringing up or I wouldn't have mentioned it. But I objected to it being used against me by another poster saying that I brought it up in THIS thread to try to dissuade people from getting vaccines or as a way of trying to gain credibility. True, nurses may have more medical or health knowledge than the general public. That doesn't make us experts on anything. We have to know a little about a lot. I enjoy the discussion and I appreciate learning from other people's points of view (or I wouldn't be here.) I've tried to remain respectful, I just ask the same in return. I found this site years ago mainly because of my feelings about the Duggars. Like most of you I knew something was "up" with them and they aren't what they seemed. I like the forum format but I just lurked here for a long time. I never explored other sections here until the now infamous Ezzo post brought me over to this section;) I listened to the PFP series almost 20 years ago. Can you imagine why I don't remember much of it? I obviously immediately threw away the junk that I didn't agree with never to be thought about again.

I did not USE it against you. I voiced concern that you may and I did stress may or could be using it to lend credibility to your opinions. You framed quite a few posts around this......giving out medication, nursing whilst not vaccinated against the flu etc. This is not disrespectful, and to be totally honest I'm not as tolerant as Mama Mia but did try to point out why your posts were aggravating to others. I'm not known for subtle or sugar coating. Part personality part culture.

I have learned a ton of stuff on this forum over the years and it has changed my opinion on issues at times. Maybe not always as the poster intended. It's good to challenge our own beliefs.

People will afford you respect when you most importantly stop whinging, and stop over explaining and make sure your knowledge is backed up reputably. Here's the thing Snarky lark. If you have an opinion and you feel really strongly about it. Good. Own it. Others may disagree but you will gain more respect if you just say....you know I see your point but I feel this way. No jumping through hoops or pages upon pages of justification.

I kind of don't care if this sounds condescending because every now and then a really good thread or discussion arises on FJ where folks have a real opportunity to share experiences and knowledge. This was one of those threads. Instead because of your posts it turned into yet another ant-vaxer thread of which there are probably hundreds.