A Theory Conforms to the Evidence

[kola]

see, u just dont get it jraxi.

you play a one-sided game.

you and a few other people here are constantly accusing me of "hit and running" but its acceptable for you to pick and choose how things go?

sorry bud.

until you find some balls and back up your opinion (that I questioned), I am done.

now do not accuse me of scampering off mad. It was YOU who continually avoided producing factual information to substaniate your claim.

Kola

[J’raxis 270145]

I picked your last five article posts, and another older one, and demonstrated how in each there was a simple explanation: The companies, doctors, &c., trying to protect their reputations and profits.

Do you actually think there is something to be gained by anyone going through your entire post history and doing that?

until you find some balls and back up your opinion (that I questioned), I am done.

One of those ad hominem attacks you keep expecting me to make, eh?

[kola]

5 articles out of how many did you say?

good science?      LOL.

your first claim was about vaccines then you went off to redefine yourself.

and yes.."find some balls" as in put up or shut up.

you have done everything under the sun but proved your statement. wheres the logic and reasoning?

it appears you need to get the last word in and have an issue with saying that maybe you were wrong huh?

but as Puke would say "hey lighten up, its just the internent dont take it serious, I'm just fuckin with ya"

now go ahead.. cuz I am done.

Kola

[J’raxis 270145]

5 articles out of how many did you say?

Out of your five most recent anti–medicine/technology article posts, five of them were explainable by corruption. That's 100%. It's not a large enough sample size to make an accurate projection, but I'd say it's pretty safe to draw some inferences from.

your first claim was about vaccines then you went off to redefine yourself.

No, my first claim was mistakenly worded, which I have now explained at least three times. The rephrased version is what you should be paying attention to. What exactly do you hope to accomplish by asking me to prove something that I've already said was incorrect?

[J’raxis 270145]

If you want to gather together all of your article posts for me, I'll be more than happy to attack each one

LOL! you are funny.

u made the claim, now prove it.

isnt that the game thats played here? 

I avoided pointing this out since I know you'll just say I'm trying to "change the subject" away from my claim about your article threads, but...

You have yet to prove your original claims that vaccination, GMO, artificial chemicals, &c., are inherently bad. You are making a positive assertion, and I'm not accepting that without proof. This whole attempt to get me to prove a claim about your articles is virtually irrelevant, and something I'm beginning to think is intentional, to divert us from the original topic.

Show me the proof that vaccination, GMO, artificial chemicals, &c., are inherently bad. If this proof exists in one or more of your previous article posts, point me to the specific post so I can (re)read it.

[Dylboz]

I must say... THAT is rather terrifying

A quick online search clearly shows that this sci-fi horror disease is quite real indeed, not to mention of recent origin.

Munchausen by proxy is awful, and made worse by a host of attention seeking copy-cats. This "disease" is worse than UFO abductees and the random chunks of stone and metal they shoved up their noses as "proof."

[J’raxis 270145]

Heh, my ignore count just went up. Way to win an argument, kola.

[NJLiberty]

My friend there was no way you were going to win that argument. I'm not sure if Kola even understood what you were actually arguing. It certainly didn't seem so from my perspective. Either that or Kola was just trying to dodge the fact that vaccination in and of itself is a very proven science, the recent problems (perceived or otherwise) aside. There is no way around the fact that for some diseases introducing a dead or weakened agent into the body can grant immunity to that disease. I didn't have my daughter vaccinated because for me the risks didn't outweigh the benefits. There is no question that there are benefits to immunization, but as with all medications they come with risks.

Having worked for the pharmaceutical industry for 8 years, I can attest to the fact that the problems with certain specific medications themselves are a function of "corruption" not a flaw in the concept of vaccination. The problems with most medications are a by-product of the ridiculous amount of government interference in the process. You can test a drug and study it for years, but until it is used in the general population there is no real way to know just what will happen with it. The problem is that when a drug is suspected of being a problem, to reformulate it in any way you need to go back through all the hoops again to get a new approval for it. The approval you are given to manufacture and sell that drug only applies if that drug exactly conforms to your original application. Vary in the slightest way from that and the entire batch will be rejected, whether the drug was effective and safe or not.

Let's say for instance that there was a problem with the preservative used in a vaccine. You can't just switch to a different equally capable preservative. You would need to reformulate, retest, resubmit, and hope the FDA (here or the equivalent organizations abroad) approves this new formulation. If they don't then it is back to the drawing board. Meanwhile, the time left on your patent for the active ingredient is ticking, or the time on your contract to provide this drug is passing by, and your ability to recoup the many millions of dollars it cost to develop this drug is going to become less and less, not counting the enormous sum of money it is going to cost to reformulate this product.

And thus you end up with a system that is ripe for corruption. You have a government system that forces pharmaceutical companies to move extremely slowly, to spend ridiculous sums of money, and comply with ridiculous quantities of regulations that do not necessarily benefit the consumer, in order to produce and distribute their products. You have a variety of government agencies and regulations at odds with one another because each has their own agenda, each trying for a larger share of the medical pie. If you are a foreign based pharmaceutical company operating here in the US then you have multiple regulatory nightmares because you will be under the scrutiny of departments and agencies from multiple countries.

From having been on the inside of this mess, it is more a wonder that anything gets done correctly, than it is that there are problems. What keeps this whole thing moving are the people on the ground level. Everyone I worked with in Research, Production, and Quality Assurance had the same philosophy about their work, that the next new drug developed, tablet pressed, etc. could be going into one of us or one of our loved ones. We did the best we could to make sure that it was manufactured and tested to determine it was as safe and as effective as possible. Unfortunately that philosophy doesn't necessarily filter up high enough to reach the movers and shakers of the world.

So while vaccination itself is a proven technology, there can certainly be problems with the individual vaccines themselves. Those problems aren't an inherent problem with vaccination, but a problem with the system that regulates, mandates, manufactures, and delivers them.

George

[dalebert]

Heh, my ignore count just went up. Way to win an argument, kola.

Mine too. Had been thinking about it for a while now.

[kola]

i still read your comments jraxi.

for now at least. 

that could change tho, yaknow brother?

Kola

[Dylboz]

Heh, my ignore count just went up. Way to win an argument, kola.

Mine too. Had been thinking about it for a while now.

Someone's whacking my karma now.

[srqrebel]

Heh, my ignore count just went up. Way to win an argument, kola.

Yeah, lately Kola has been dancing dangerously close to my ignore button, too... in spite of the fact that I do enjoy a lot of his posts.

Petty bickering and personal attacks (whether deserved or not!) are a surefire way to lose my interest. The only reason I even engage in debate, is to refine my knowledge base. That can only be accomplished by staying rational and openminded to criticism, and keeping my own responses civil despite the manner of my 'opponent' (not that I always succeed at it). But when my 'opponent' appears more interested in attacking me than providing constructive feedback, it is no longer a debate, but an argument at best -- and at that point the conversation loses all its value to me.

[srqrebel]

The Wikipedia entry documents a number of theories as to the causes. It may be a new, real disease, or it may just be psychological.

I wondered why you would suggest that it "may be psychological", then I read this in the Wikipedia article:

...and the collection of fibers is part of the delusion.

I beg pardon??! How the hell can something (elsewhere described as) "lesions that heal slowly and ooze out blue, black or white fibers that can be several millimeters long ...[which] appear like pliable plastic ...can be as fine as spider silk, yet strong enough to distend the skin when pulled and elicit shooting pains when you try to remove them" be considered a delusion?

While I would certainly not jump to conclusions as to the cause of this fibrous affliction, based on the current extremely limited knowledge base, it seems that calling an affliction of such an easily verifiable nature a "delusion" represents in itself the height of delusion.

[kola]

Heh, my ignore count just went up. Way to win an argument, kola.

Yeah, lately Kola has been dancing dangerously close to my ignore button, too... in spite of the fact that I do enjoy a lot of his posts.

Petty bickering and personal attacks (whether deserved or not!) are a surefire way to lose my interest. The only reason I even engage in debate, is to refine my knowledge base. That can only be accomplished by staying rational and openminded to criticism, and keeping my own responses civil despite the manner of my 'opponent' (not that I always succeed at it). But when my 'opponent' appears more interested in attacking me than providing constructive feedback, it is no longer a debate, but an argument at best -- and at that point the conversation loses all its value to me.

I believe jarxi is implying i put him on ignore.

as for you menno, I do not think I have ever "attacked" you.

as for me  "attacking others (and I have said this time and again) My "attacks are almost always provoked and in retaliation. I TRY to debate and "discuss" but all I get is people posting funny pictures or videos, sarcastic comments or a ridiculous one sided challenge where the other person expects me to jump through their "hoop" for their amusement. And then I have one of your buddies who just likes "fucking with me."

How many times have I presented info, been questioned about it and replied back and answered their questions to the best to my abilities. And how many times have I asked someone a question and never got a response and/or jthe person ignored it and presented another question. It is a bit diifficult to have a REAL discussion when one person is telling the other one how high to jump, shouting out commands but never addressing other concerns. Its a half-assed lopside childrens game and a huge waste of time. And for anyone who was REALLY interested, it becomes a turn-off because the waters have been muddied with shenanigans, funny pictures and sarcasm.  


Go back and read my posts menno and pick out where I was the instigator. But maybe your mind is made up so leave it at that... no skin off my back.
BTW I really dont care what my "karma" is or if someone ignores me. I am a big boy and don't get offended by petty crap like that.  

Kola

[kola]

The Wikipedia entry documents a number of theories as to the causes. It may be a new, real disease, or it may just be psychological.

I wondered why you would suggest that it "may be psychological", then I read this in the Wikipedia article:

...and the collection of fibers is part of the delusion.

I beg pardon??! How the hell can something (elsewhere described as) "lesions that heal slowly and ooze out blue, black or white fibers that can be several millimeters long ...[which] appear like pliable plastic ...can be as fine as spider silk, yet strong enough to distend the skin when pulled and elicit shooting pains when you try to remove them" be considered a delusion?

While I would certainly not jump to conclusions as to the cause of this fibrous affliction, based on the current extremely limited knowledge base, it seems that calling an affliction of such an easily verifiable nature a "delusion" represents in itself the height of delusion.

so tell me Menno:

should I post a funny sarcastic picture in reference to your comments?

should I call you tinfoilboy?

should I ask you to show me your research?

should I then not read your research after you dig it up, read it and spent time posting it?

should I then question your research, point out flaws, but never back my opinion up with anything substantial but my mere opinion?

should I ignore all or any questions that you present to me?

should I then jump around and then present you with another question?

Ya see Menno, doing all those things listed above it not a debate. I have particpated in several REAL debates. And OTOH carrying on like the above is not even an adult conversation.

it is what Puke calls it:
"fucking with people".

Kola