Number Of Early Childhood Vaccines Not Linked To Autism - NPR Report

  • 89 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#51 Posted by EatShanna (875 posts) -
What, Dr. Jenny McCarthy was wrong? No way!
#52 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (4109 posts) -

A government news organization claims that government mandated vaccinations do not cause autism. NPR has no credibility.Laihendi
Lai, if you drink alot of solvents very quickly it gives you super powers.

I promise....

#53 Posted by jimkabrhel (15422 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]A government news organization claims that government mandated vaccinations do not cause autism. NPR has no credibility.MakeMeaSammitch

Lai, if you drink alot of solvents very quickly it gives you super powers.

I promise....

Chloroform is the best for that. ;)

#54 Posted by DroidPhysX (17093 posts) -
Vaccines do cause autism Case study: Lai
#55 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (4109 posts) -

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] I have not done research on a potential link between vaccines and autism, but I do not believe anything that NPR says just because they say it. It is not a legitimate source of news.Laihendi

What is a legitimate news source then?

http://reason.com/

http://www.cato.org/

http://www.forbes.com/

Those are legitimate news sources.

The front page of forbes is reporting the study that shows no relationship.

Holy crap you're stupid. 

#56 Posted by DroidPhysX (17093 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"] What is a legitimate news source then? MakeMeaSammitch

http://reason.com/

http://www.cato.org/

http://www.forbes.com/

Those are legitimate news sources.

The front page of forbes is reporting the study that shows no relationship.

Holy crap you're stupid. 

Wait until I link Lai the cato piece where they defend Obama.

#57 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (4109 posts) -

[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] Calling his drivel a philosophy gives it too much credit. Laihendi

The same could be said for Ayn Rand.

Have you even read Atlas Shrugged?

i played bioshock.

basically the same thing 

#58 Posted by DroidPhysX (17093 posts) -

Since this is Forbes, Laihendi believes in this story.

#59 Posted by Laihendi (5834 posts) -

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]

http://reason.com/

http://www.cato.org/

http://www.forbes.com/

Those are legitimate news sources.

DroidPhysX

The front page of forbes is reporting the study that shows no relationship.

Holy crap you're stupid. 

Wait until I link Lai the cato piece where they defend Obama.

Please do so. I suspect you are bluffing.
#60 Posted by DroidPhysX (17093 posts) -

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]The front page of forbes is reporting the study that shows no relationship.

Holy crap you're stupid. 

Laihendi

Wait until I link Lai the cato piece where they defend Obama.

Please do so. I suspect you are bluffing.

lol no

#61 Posted by Laihendi (5834 posts) -

Since this is Forbes, Laihendi believes in this story.

DroidPhysX
That is an op-ed article and does not reflect the values or integrity of Forbes.
#62 Posted by -Sun_Tzu- (17384 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]

The same could be said for Ayn Rand.

MakeMeaSammitch

Have you even read Atlas Shrugged?

i played bioshock.

basically the same thing 

Except for the fact that it's actually entertaining
#63 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (4109 posts) -

[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] Being biased in favour of liberty is synonymous with being biased in favour of objective reality. To criticize a news organization for exposing the human rights violations promoted and carried out by statists is absurd.

And Jim the study mentioned in the article you linked was funded by the CDC which is a government organization.

Laihendi

So how does that change your view of Forbes as a news source if they are posting news with government funded research on their site?

You are trying to impose an appeal to authority on me. Forbes is a legitimate news organization but that does not mean that they do not make honest mistakes. They published that story on the false premise that they were responding to a legitimate study, and they of course were not. The difference between Forbes and NPR is that Forbes works to provide objective journalism, whereas NPR works to promote statism.

lol, if forbes agrees with me they're a legit source.

If they don't they're making a mistake.

#64 Posted by DroidPhysX (17093 posts) -
[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

Since this is Forbes, Laihendi believes in this story.

Laihendi
That is an op-ed article and does not reflect the values or integrity of Forbes.

It is indeed legitimate.
#65 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (4109 posts) -

lai, you never answered my question.

Is slavery ok if the slave is purchsed through legal means for use in a business?

If it's no ok, isn't that just interference with free market? 

#66 Posted by -Sun_Tzu- (17384 posts) -
[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

Since this is Forbes, Laihendi believes in this story.

Laihendi
That is an op-ed article and does not reflect the values or integrity of Forbes.

Of course not, that would assume they have integrity in the first place.
#67 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (4109 posts) -

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]Have you even read Atlas Shrugged?-Sun_Tzu-

i played bioshock.

basically the same thing 

Except for the fact that it's actually entertaining

halfway through bioshock infinite there's an area that would make ayn rand proud.

#68 Posted by Laihendi (5834 posts) -

lai, you never answered my question.

Is slavery ok if the slave is purchsed through legal means for use in a business?

If it's no ok, isn't that just interference with free market? 

MakeMeaSammitch
Please explain how a market is free if humans are being forced into slavery. Your question is just stupid.
#69 Posted by Laihendi (5834 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

Wait until I link Lai the cato piece where they defend Obama.

DroidPhysX

Please do so. I suspect you are bluffing.

lol no

That is just another op-ed. Please show me actual journalism where cato defends Obama.
#70 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (4109 posts) -

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

lai, you never answered my question.

Is slavery ok if the slave is purchsed through legal means for use in a business?

If it's no ok, isn't that just interference with free market? 

Laihendi

Please explain how a market is free if humans are being forced into slavery. Your question is just stupid.

there are being bought and sold freely without the government stepping in and making it illegal (socialist).

that's free market.

#71 Posted by DroidPhysX (17093 posts) -
[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] Please do so. I suspect you are bluffing.Laihendi

lol no

That is just another op-ed. Please show me actual journalism where cato defends Obama.

I just linked it to you
#72 Posted by Laihendi (5834 posts) -
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

lol no

DroidPhysX
That is just another op-ed. Please show me actual journalism where cato defends Obama.

I just linked it to you

No you did not. An op-ed is an opinion, not objective journalism.
#73 Posted by DroidPhysX (17093 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

lai, you never answered my question.

Is slavery ok if the slave is purchsed through legal means for use in a business?

If it's no ok, isn't that just interference with free market? 

MakeMeaSammitch

Please explain how a market is free if humans are being forced into slavery. Your question is just stupid.

there are being bought and sold freely without the government stepping in and making it illegal (socialist).

that's free market.

p. sure lai thinks the 13th amendment is statist
#74 Posted by DroidPhysX (17093 posts) -
[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="DroidPhysX"][QUOTE="Laihendi"] That is just another op-ed. Please show me actual journalism where cato defends Obama.

I just linked it to you

No you did not. An op-ed is an opinion, not objective journalism.

If you wanted objective journalism, you wouldn't be visiting Cato.
#75 Posted by Laihendi (5834 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

lai, you never answered my question.

Is slavery ok if the slave is purchsed through legal means for use in a business?

If it's no ok, isn't that just interference with free market? 

MakeMeaSammitch

Please explain how a market is free if humans are being forced into slavery. Your question is just stupid.

there are being bought and sold freely without the government stepping in and making it illegal (socialist).

that's free market.

The purpose of government is to enforce the natural rights of its constituency. Saying that it is socialist to outlaw slavery is stupid, just as saying that a slave market is "free" is stupid.
#76 Posted by worlock77 (22547 posts) -

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

Since this is Forbes, Laihendi believes in this story.

Laihendi

That is an op-ed article and does not reflect the values or integrity of Forbes.

They chose to publish it so yes, it does.

#77 Posted by XilePrincess (13130 posts) -
While I agree it might be best for the child in many ways to space out vaccines and not have them all in one day (irritation and inflammation of the injection site, and a little body trying to fight strains of multiple things at one time doesn't sound like a great idea), I have had probably every childhood vaccine available and surprise! I don't have autism. I only know a handful of people who have autism and I really don't believe that the common denominator is vaccines because hundreds of kids got the same vaccines the autistic kid got, but don't have autism.
#78 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (4109 posts) -

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] Please explain how a market is free if humans are being forced into slavery. Your question is just stupid.Laihendi

there are being bought and sold freely without the government stepping in and making it illegal (socialist).

that's free market.

The purpose of government is to enforce the natural rights of its constituency. Saying that it is socialist to outlaw slavery is stupid, just as saying that a slave market is "free" is stupid.

but that's government interfering with the economy.

and that's bad!

#79 Posted by worlock77 (22547 posts) -

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] Please explain how a market is free if humans are being forced into slavery. Your question is just stupid.Laihendi

there are being bought and sold freely without the government stepping in and making it illegal (socialist).

that's free market.

The purpose of government is to enforce the natural rights of its constituency. Saying that it is socialist to outlaw slavery is stupid, just as saying that a slave market is "free" is stupid.

Maybe those slaves have no concept of natural rights.

#80 Posted by GOGOGOGURT (4470 posts) -

I love how moms are willing to risk their childrens lives based on what they see on the news.

 

Your child is more likely to die from the flu than get damaged from perfectly safe vaccines.

#81 Posted by mattbbpl (10770 posts) -
[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] Please explain how a market is free if humans are being forced into slavery. Your question is just stupid.Laihendi

there are being bought and sold freely without the government stepping in and making it illegal (socialist).

that's free market.

The purpose of government is to enforce the natural rights of its constituency. Saying that it is socialist to outlaw slavery is stupid, just as saying that a slave market is "free" is stupid.

Interesting statement. By the same logic, would you agree, then, that part of the purpose of government is to enforce the right to life of it's constituency through EPA and FDA regulation?
#82 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (4109 posts) -

lai, you still haven't replied to my post.

#83 Posted by Riverwolf007 (24035 posts) -

pfft.

who you gonna believe?

lying ass facts, studies and science or this chick?

th?id=H.4973603120874441&pid=15.1

still not good enough?

then lets bring in jennys scientific research consultant.

th?id=H.4972048344155652&pid=15.1

take that science!

th?id=H.4717661749314535&pid=15.1

#84 Posted by DirigiblePlums (142 posts) -
A government news organization claims that government mandated vaccinations do not cause autism. NPR has no credibility.Laihendi
I will never look at Bulbasaur the same way...
#85 Posted by Laihendi (5834 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

Since this is Forbes, Laihendi believes in this story.

worlock77

That is an op-ed article and does not reflect the values or integrity of Forbes.

They chose to publish it so yes, it does.

Do you even know what an op-ed is? The whole point is to show what people outside of the organization think on a particular issue.
#86 Posted by dramaybaz (6020 posts) -
Why are people still debating this?
#87 Posted by DirigiblePlums (142 posts) -
Why are people still debating this?dramaybaz
#88 Posted by Rioichi21Cooper (227 posts) -
[QUOTE="Laihendi"]A government news organization claims that government mandated vaccinations do not cause autism. NPR has no credibility.DirigiblePlums
I will never look at Bulbasaur the same way...

My thoughts exactly!
#89 Posted by worlock77 (22547 posts) -

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] That is an op-ed article and does not reflect the values or integrity of Forbes.Laihendi

They chose to publish it so yes, it does.

Do you even know what an op-ed is? The whole point is to show what people outside of the organization think on a particular issue.

Rick Ungar is not from outside the organization, he's a regular writer for Forbes. Notwithstanding the fact that they have final say-so over what gets published in their magazine and on their website. So yes, the content is a reflection on them. That's why, for instance, the local pro-Republican newspaper here doesn't publish articles that favor Democrats.