Kimmo

events like bombs planted in the middle of the public, which happened to be civil right marchers on MLK day. no. your position was that the spokane attempt did not get the media coverage of other similar events. i asked which other similar events?

which events of a similar nature?

uh, yeah!

so your position is that because there was little media coverage of a failed bombing attempt in spokane, this is indicative of a victory by the right-wing media machine?

seems to me the environmentally responsible thing with this one would have been to ignore taco bell's lie.

do you feel the above is really true? (i'm also wondering how "honestly" you feel any mainstream media has talked about "terrorism" ever. It's a little too convenient to pin this one on the current efforts of the "right-wing media", perhaps another example of how (unconsciously) polarized we really have become. SHOUT OUT TO ROBBIE!).

what are you trying to say? you did nip kinda hard the other night....

interesting notion, but: how would you set rates? if a particular vaccine has a 1 in 10,000 chance of causing a serious life-threatening reaction, but the disease it is used against only has a 1 in 100,000 chance of being caught by an un-vaccinated individual, then it seems, using risk metrics, rates would be higher for the vaccinated. add to this the low chance of hospitalizable complications with a particular innocuous vaccinatable disease.... i also doubt that insurance co's can use premiums as a punitive measure? it'd be interesting to see such an attempt play out.... then of course there are all the adults like e-rock and ET and JayB and Rob and off-white(?) etal who haven't had their boosters; you all would be volunteering to pay higher premiums because of your strong moral convictions. seems fair to me....

all definitions of such matters will come from ET.

are you in grad school?

i thought it to be rather straight-forward: the pertussis vaccine seems to lose its efficacy over time. it's enough of a concern that the CDC itself is investigating the 2010 "epidemic", due to the number of what, 7 to 10 year olds affected etc, and the apparency of vaccine efficacy loss. you might have a misunderstanding about the nature of the CDC: it isn't the final say on infectious diseases; it relies on research from outside sources, and responds to political pressure (define it as you may).

"i got an upper degree in Cute." ahhahahahahahahaaa

which argument? for some, any argument is worth having, even if it's with one's self.

You even suck at sybolic logic. Kimmi,"dear". "sybolic logic"?? CUTE!!! calling out someone's typo with a typo IS..... cute! don't deny your cuteness.

such subtleties are lost on this crowd. they'd rather assume they know everything.

You even suck at sybolic logic. Kimmi,"dear". that's ok. i know you got my back covered with your upper degrees. Man, between your PhD's, ET's directorship of the ACLU, Dwayner's PhD, and selkirk's clucking, we've got a board of geniuses here. unfortunately it doesn't show.

You even suck at sybolic logic. Kimmi,"dear". "sybolic logic"?? CUTE!!!

i like how you guys make assumptions and then run with them. cute, really. no, really!

It's also true that just because you are exposed to an illness it is not 100% you will get it. Guess you should forgo the vaccination and "take a chance" (kind of like Russian Roulette). There's more to this than an individual's susceptibility to an illness. If the vaccine is effective for a large majority the laws of probability kick in and the spread of an illness is vastly reduced. If everyone is unvaccinated, it is easier to spread the illness and do so quickly. Is the smallpox vaccine 100% for all people? Because interestingly enough that illness was wiped off the planet thanks to the vaccine (except for a few government deep freezers...). And smallpox also requires booster shots for immunity. Don't confuse Kimmo with science. He went to graduate school, you know. are we back to meows? you guys are all like adrenalized chickens, clucking and pecking and making lots of noise, but really saying verrrry verrry little! Seat-belts? not use? come on rob, you're smarter than that. ET even said so. oh wait.... so you're driving around in your hoopty, you notice your seat-belt is getting kinda thin from where your belly is rubbin' on it, might you consider replacing it? or is this too much of an intellectual stretch, seeing cause and effect? and kkk really really just doesn't get it. too many times this has happened with other subjects, so i won't waste my breath.

that comment was somewhat satirical, but a speech by him certainly made interesting reading. nothing to do with autism and vaccines (a specious connection, seemingly); more to do with his vast experience with smallpox in pakistan years ago. his analyses of the disease, the reasons for its periodic proliferation, his thoughts on the future, with or without vaccines for it. he also spoke out against the CDC's recent proposal for smallpox vaccinations (as did offit). i think his comments about smallpox have been taken by the "anti-vaccine" crowd as further proof of the non-necessity of vaccines....

i am sincerely at a loss as to why you would have trouble with the basic logic of this position.

would quoting Tom Mack, smallpox expert, USC prof, change the equation?

good lord, do you really think i have any vested interest in the guilt or innocence of the man? you seem to have a lot invested in this.

i am telling you all to go get your pertussis boosters, yet you accuse me of being "anti-vaccine"?

if you do not get the booster shot, you do increase your chances of getting pertussis. if YOU get pertussis, you increase your family members' chances of getting it, PARTICULARLY the ones too young to have been vaccinated against it. from what i've read, pertussis is a benign pain in the ass for older children, but deadly in those less than 1 yr old, with a mortality rate of <=~1%. so, my point is that anyone here who is stridently "pro-vaccine" needs to, for obvious reasons, go get their pertussis booster immediately.