Originally Posted by
DHfan
From Wiki:
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control has warned that data from VAERS is not enough to determine whether a vaccine can cause a particular adverse event.
People can believe what they like, but personally I'd no more believe VAERS than a random bloke in the street.
But you believe what you read on Wikipaedia? That's astounding.
Originally Posted by dr dre
The problem is the the tactics anti vaxxers use to trick people is they make their arguments just convincing enough to make people hesitant. If they out and out said “vaccines will make you grow a second head” most people would realise they are nuts.
What they do is dress up their arguments with what just appears to be enough credibility, by taking stats from official sources but using them out of context or not how the authors of the stats intended them to be used......
......Soundssort of official and like the poster knows what they’re talking about, right?
The style you've described sounds remarkably similar to your own. Is this a case of "it takes one to know one"? Or, "You can't bulls**t a bulls**tter"? I suspect that while your researched opinions sound somewhat plausible on here, you would most likely stumble in a live debate or a heated pub discussion. Why is it okay (in your mind) when you do it but it's a capital offence for someone else with an opposing opinion to do the same thing?
Originally Posted by Chronic Snoozer
Why not?
No particular reason. I only mentioned what I did to save any rabies-sufferer from jumping to a conclusion and derailing the thread with a rant about my status.