I'm really not afraid of big words. I would tell you my ACT scores from last year to prove it, only they're confidential. Let's just say my vocabulary is above average.

Science? I love it, actually. I strive to be a programmer when I graduate college. Scientism, on the other hand? Horrifying, but another rabbit hole.

The ingrediants do scare me. I mean, The mercury compound alone is listed as a toxin, a health hazard, and an enviornmental hazard here. Yes, sugar and table salt are harmless, but I fail to see the logic behind why it's bad to have formaldehyde in floors, mercury in fish, and aluminum in deodorant, but it's okay to inject all of that directly into your bloodstream up to 72 times.

But the thing that scares me most is that nobody (Well, nobody in power to do anything about it, anyway.) seems to be questioning this scientific law we call vaccines. Just the other day, the New York governer decided to mandate vaccines for people with religious exemptions. We shouldn't be pressured into something reguarding our health like that, greater good or not.

And that's my main point in this. To get people thinking about the issue and to form their own oppinion outside of what was told. Reasarch all angles, then decide for yourself.

I just wanna point out really quickly- thimerosal isnt in childhood vaccines anymore (removes on 2001).

As for mmr, (according to the cdc official information website) there has never been thimerosal in it, as well as the chickenpox vaccine and a few others

Of course this isnt saying that no vaccines contain it, but thimerosal, in the dose it has in vaccines, is super easy for our happy little bodies to break up

Vaccines are given over time because if we got all 72 vaccines at once, then yeah, I wont deny thats probably bad, but thats why these things are spaced out, because everything is about moderation when it comes to doses

Throwing in another point- vaccinations arent a my body my choice sort of thing, as one person not vaccinating can infect others (unvaccinated people traveling to underdeveloped countries are absolute tragedies)

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/thimerosal/index.html

Take this with a grain of salt, as its A reddit ask, also has a lot of extremely graphic descriptions of horrible things. Theres also an abundance of anti vaccine hate in there (since a lot of people there are talking about their experiences in the medical field)

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/9zfiiz/doctors_of_reddit_what_are_some_of_your_worst/

Regarding the formaldehyde in flooring, mercury in fish, and aluminum in deodorant...

The short answer is.... it's not okay. Too much of any of the above can seriously harm you. But it's more complicated than that.

There are multiple kinds of formaldehyde. Some kinds are very toxic and some are not. In fact, I guarantee that you have eaten foods that create natural formaldehyde. Hell, your own body produces formaldehyde.
Some floorings contain the toxic kind but only in very small amounts. Some companies like to cut corners and use more than they probably should. That's why we HAVE governmental regulation. To try to prevent companies from taking advantage of the ignorant end user who doesn't know any better. We banned the use of lead paint and the creation of asbestos products for just that reason.

In normal amounts, the mercury in fish will not harm you. It leaves your body slowly over time so as long. By the way, the mercury in fish isn't natural. It's a consequence of human pollution. So I guess we're poisoning ourselves? Go figure.

The aluminum in deodorant is a known carcinogen. Specifically it's used in antiperspirants. I personally prefer to use a straight deodorant with no antiperspirant when I can. There aren't too many but they can be found. So this one can be completely avoided.



Also...

A scientific "law" has a very specific definition that, if you're going to talk science, I recommend you take note of. It's different from the layman's definition of law. Here's the definitions directly from the internet (because it's late and I'm tired of typing).
"A scientific law is a statement based on repeated experiments or observations that describe some aspect of the natural world."

Laws are often equations or statements. Newton's Laws of Motion are well known, for example. We also have laws for gravity and quantum mechanics and all sorts of fun stuff.

You should also know the definition for a scientific "theory".
"an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results."

A scientific theory confuses a lot of people because it's sort of the opposite of the layman's theory. Theories are... usually explanations for how the world around us works. They use known laws as part of their explanations. They are heavily tested and generally accepted as true by the scientific community. The theory of gravity is a good example. We also have, oddly enough, germ theory. The whole reason for this thread.



I'm not saying that you shouldn't research all angles and decide for yourself. You absolutely should. But I feel that you are only scratching the surface and making a decision before you get all the facts. Vaccination has a long and complicated history and you are by no means the first person to doubt their effectiveness or safety. Most people don't bother to look into the details because science is hard and there's a lot to know and think about. Historically it has taken well-liked public figures (like Elvis or Catherine the Great of Russia) getting themselves vaccinated to convince the public that it's safe.

Or, you know, just ignore everything we say and be the next Typhoid Mary.



p.s. No seriously, Catherine the Great has an amazing life story. You should totally look her up.
p.p.s. Typhoid Mary is really interesting too. Not in the same way Catherine is, though....

Also I had to look up what scientism was. Seems simplistic to me. I can't say that I've met any scientists that look to science as if it's a philosophy. But, statistically I suppose somebody has to.

Yes, thimerosal isn't in all vaccines, but saying a little bit of thimerosal is expelled easily is like saying a tiny bit of cyanide is expelled easily; True as it is, you'd still rather not have in in your body to begin with.

But also realize that there are other dubious ingredients in those vaccines. Just read this. Bovine syrum and Canine kidney protiens stand out to me as the most questionable.

And why shouldn't at least some vaccines be a 'my body, my choice' sort of thing? Yes, some dieases do spread easily and I understand the reasoning there, but my counterargument would be there are several dieases that have vaccines that really can't spread at all unless infected bodily fluids mix (such as Hep and tetnus), while others (like measels or chicken pox) give you life long immunities after one infection.

Now, I won't deny the measels outbreaks and that it can be potentially fatal (like almost any other ailment), but complications and deaths are rare and the disease can usually clear up perfectly fine on it's own. Based on a study from 1985-1992, unless you are malnourished in an underdevoloped country, the chance of an infected person dying is around 0.2%.

Also, our rights as patients state that we can refuse healthcare (which vaccines technically fall under), weather it's smart or not. There are exeptions, like if you're below a certian age or you're delerious, but typically, that should be the case.

I take it that you believe that vaccine safety is still in the 'theroy' part of the scientific method. I'm sorry if I didn't catch that initially, but it seems like the media is selling it as a scientific law, with the law's statement being 'vaccines are safe', and there seems to be enough time and reasarch that went into it. The way I was taught the method was:

Observation
Hypothisis
Experimenting
Theroy
More experimenting over a longer time
Scientific Law
Continued experimenting as questions arise

I could have rememberd wrong, though, so I'll be more careful.


P.S. I'll look into them. Is Mary like Ben-Franklin-interesting or Caligula-interesting?

As for kids who dont really get a choice in their vaccination, thimerosal is no concern due to the fact its not in their vaccines. Vaccinating kids against things like tetanus is very important though, because it can be caught from cutting yourself on a rusty surface (which is more likely for kids than youd think) and can cause permanent damage (like brain damage, lockjaw)

When you look at the ingredients, some of them may seem peculiar at first, but its good to see what they actually do. Bovine serum thing and dog kidney cells serve very similar purposes, and the dog thing is just an alternate version of chicken egg protein that can be produced easier, all three are just there to keep the virus stable.

Even if you do have lifelong immunities, its just not worth the risk. The risks of staying unvaccinated are so Exponentially higher than getting vaccinated

0.2% of death is much higher than the risk of getting a vaccine injury. Even if the percent of death is low, its still to high for a disease that you wouldnt even need to have.

Chickenpox can also lead to shingles in the future, as the virus can lay dormant in nerve cells for lifetimes. Shingles are incredibly painful rashes that can possibly last up to years, so even if you think youre better in the long term by not getting the vaccine, it has a high chance of coming back to bite you in the future (one in 3 people have had shingles in America)

Honestly, looking at the diseases vs the vaccines makes me really nervous, like I wanna get more protection against these things, I was looking at meningitis, all of your limbs can go necrotic super quickly, even if you do manage to survive

(P.S. for anyone whos around the age of 16, its recommended you get re-vaccinated for meningitis. It spreads among teens-college age kids a lot because it spreads through saliva. I cant stress how horrible meningitis is, it can kill you within hours, and even if you do manage to survive it, theres no way youll get out with all of your limbs)

Thank you for providing a source.

"The DNA is breaking down, and that fragmented DNA can be easily absorbed by your body's cells, more easily than a whole strand of DNA. I think you can imagine how that can go horribly wrong."

Assuming that the DNA can enter your cells in the first place, I don't see how it's going to be able to screw anything up. The nucleus of eukaryotic cells has a barrier that prevents macromolecules from entering/exiting it when they're not supposed to, effectively preventing DNA from vaccines/food/ect. from changing our genome, which is what I assume you're implying.

"As for the mercury compound found in the vaccines, thimerosal, it's listed as a toxin, a health hazard, and an enviornmental hazard here."

The dose is a very important factor. Going back to water, too much of it can seriously screw up your body, and eventually kill you, but drinking a normal amount of it is perfectly fine. Anything in too high of a dose is bad for you, but the amount of thimerosal in vaccines, as DruidOfBees has already said, leaves your body fairly quickly. The amounts of aluminum and formaldehyde are also in doses too small to cause much, if any, damage.

"And why shouldn't at least some vaccines be a 'my body, my choice' sort of thing? Yes, some dieases do spread easily and I understand the reasoning there, but my counterargument would be there are several dieases that have vaccines that really can't spread at all unless infected bodily fluids mix (such as Hep and tetnus), while others (like measels or chicken pox) give you life long immunities after one infection."

Coughing, sneezing, bleeding, vomiting, ect. will likely spread diseases that are spread via body fluids.

To highlight the severity of the diseases you cited as not being easily spread:

Tetanus is extremely serious and causes nerve damage, which results in spasms and stiffness that can interfere with your ability to breathe, which can lead to death. Spasms can also break bones if they get bad enough. It is unlikely to spread from person to person, but it is possible if dirty needles are used for things such as tattoos or drugs.

Hepatitis can lead to symptoms such as vomiting/nausea, diarrhea, stomach pain, and jaundice, among other things. Jaundice from this disease arises from liver damage, as the liver helps get rid of red blood cells that break down. This causes a buildup of certain chemicals in your body. Your liver also helps clear your body of toxic substances, such as mercury, aluminum, ect.

Tetanus vaccines should be given to children because you can get it via splinters, rusty nails, animal/insect bites, ect. These are things children could easily be exposed to, and if the vaccine won't harm them, then there is no logical reason to subject them to such a disease. If later you decide that you don't want the booster shots, fine, you probably aren't a danger to others if you catch it, but a little kid can't really make an informed decision about it anyway, so it's better to keep them safe, in my opinion.

Hepatitis is much more infectious. If the feces or body fluid of the infected person (made much more likely from vomiting) enters your body, you will be infected. I would argue that this makes vaccination important for hepatitis as well.

As for lifelong immunity, I think that argument is quite weak. Vaccination provides immunity, too, and without many of the nasty symptoms in the severity that you get from the live, unweakened diseases they protect against. To me, a booster shot seems like a small price to pay for avoiding nerve damage.

Mmm, yea that's how I've seen it taught in high schools but it's not 100% correct. It's good enough for a basic general science education but if you want to go further in the sciences you have to go a bit deeper.

A theory is a theory is a theory. The Theory of Evolution is never going to become a law. It will always be a theory. But that's not because there is a lack of evidence against it or because we don't know enough to make it a law. Everything we know about genetics and ecology supports the theory of evolution. It's because it is a long and complicated theorem that we use to explain the world around us. Because all the evidence points to the theory of evolution being true, we take it as truth. At least until proven otherwise. But at this point there's been so much research into evolution that it's unlikely to be proven false. If anything it'll be changed slightly when new information is discovered.

A law is generally a lot more simplistic and often takes the form of an equation or simple statement. Take the Law of Conservation of Mass. It states that, in a closed system, the amount of cumulative mass in a system cannot change. That's it. It seems obvious but it's a fundamentally important law in physics and chemistry especially.


p.s. Mary is... tornado interesting. A natural disaster that you know is terrible but that you just help but watch in fascination.