In the face of Climategate, are you going to become a global warming skeptic again?

The point of taking a risk has to be slightly corrected. There are only two really serious diseases that should be taken care of as they turn deadly, diphtheria and tetanus, and maybe meanwhile H1N1 if there is a preexisting medical condition with the lungs. So I kind of get the need to vaccinate here as the risk outweighs the doubt. However the former two diseases are unlikely to be caught at the age of one, and the latter is very very controversial for small children. So I rather delay the vaccines until the body of the child is mature enough to compensate all the stuff in the vaccine. As for the rest, this is just stupid childplay. Oh, well, then my child has the measles at one time. It gets over it with todays medical structure (even without) in no time and built up immunity naturally. So why risking to inject all that stuff here I ask? Whats the point…

And with all this herd immunity. I wonder about the propaganda claiming that tetanus sick people had vaccines in them, that a recent polio outbreak happened within a vaccinated community.

It all comes down to this. There are no serious and unbiased and honest opinions out there that truly inform. There can’t be as long as people take advantage of the dumbness of the masses….So all the pro opinions are pointless, all the contr opinions are manufactured as well, so I just sit there and see what happens and meanwhile believe no one anymore! Then it all comes back to “do I want my child to be injected with stuff that is potentially devastating with no unbiased proven benefit” and the answer is “no, if I there is a chance that my child cannot handle it”

Then you’re just opting for a proven risk over an unproven risk.
Granted, the risk of infection may be low for now thanks to herd immunity, but that will change if others in your community follow suit.

Living conditions may have improved, but the population has grown, there’s more travel, and diseases like measles are still highly contagious. Without vaccinations, their rates probably would’ve increased, not decreased.

From the article: “the evidence strongly supports the conclusion that the increasing autism prevalence is due to increased efforts to make the diagnosis and a broadening of the definition of autism. The evidence is not sufficient to conclude that there is not also a real increase in ASD incidence, but nor is there data to support this conclusion.”

By the way, even if it turns out that Autism rates are rising, the idea that just because there has been increases in vaccinations at the same time that Autism rates might be rising doesn’t prove causation, there have probably been hundreds of other increasing events that could equally be blamed if correlation is the only criteria. Science is more complicated that that.

An exact quote from Jefferson’s article states….

“Inactivated parenteral vaccines were 30% effective (95% CI 17% to 41%) against influenza-like illness, and 80% (95% CI 56% to 91%) efficacious against influenza when the vaccine matched the circulating strain and circulation was high, but decreased to 50% (95% CI 27% to 65%) when it did not.”

So, the flu shot is 30% effective against ‘influenza-like illness’. Not bad actually. This is more than I expected, given that the vaccine is specifically made to protect against a certain strain of influenza A.

It is 80% effective against Flu A when well matched with the circulating strain.

Again, pretty good.

It is even 50% efficacious against unmatched strains.

So, even if poorly matched, if most people in the community are vaccinated, at least 50% of them would have significant protection. And the 50% that were not protected by their own immunity would benefit from by having their risk of exposure decreased due to the 50% that were protected.

This added layer of protection becomes significant only when large numbers of people are vaccinated. This is called herd immunity.

The H1N1 vaccine is extremely well matched to the circulating virus. So if we go with the 80% efficacy number that Dr. Jefferson refers to in this scenario, then the herd immunity effects should be quite high if communities can achieve decent vaccination rates. There will be many less flu related deaths.

If people get both flu vaccines this year in significant numbers, the herd immunity effects will compliment each other.

The downside is extremely small (cost, pain at the injection, rare reactions).

Why all the controversy?

Incorrect. The question of origins is a minor issue in the evo vs. ID debate. What is at issue is the cause of *speciation*. Scientists and rational people “believe” that evolution is the most likely explanation; IDers believe that Go-, er, I mean, ‘an intelligent entity’ did it.

Different materials fail in different ways, but it is not mysterious for a steel building to collapse very quickly once it’s foundation has been undercut. Steel is strong in tension loads while concrete is strong in compression loads (which is why you reinforce concrete with steel). With the foundation undercut and the steel strength weakened by heat (steel can get very weak from heat without actually melting), it is no surprise that the building fell as quickly as it did. Basically steel and concrete will hold on until they reach their failure point and then let go entirely. Unlike wood buildings or mixed materials buildings which will show a lot more deflection before they collapse. There. You have my educated answer. Will you consider it? Or will you move the goalposts, throw up more “anomalies” and try to obfuscate the issue.