General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe latest battleground in anti-vaxx nuttery: the package insert.
Their newest gambit in trying to discourage patients from getting immunized against deadly diseases.
"The only way for you to know what's in the vaccine is for the doctor to show you the package insert. But they don't show it to you, do they? "DO THEY?!?"
I tell you, for people who think vaccines are an evil plot concocted by the government and the pharmaceutical companies, they place a lot of trust in the package insert printed and placed by the pharmaceutical companies and required by law to be in there by the Federal government.
redstatebluegirl
(12,264 posts)TheBlackAdder
(28,028 posts).
Here's a funny SpongeBob bit.
.
ck4829
(34,905 posts)AJT
(5,240 posts)could frolic pharmaceutical free(cuz who knows what might be in any medicine). Hopefully no one would step on a rusty nail.
MineralMan
(146,116 posts)Most people don't ask, and don't really want to read it, anyhow. But, if you ask, you can read it.
I always sit in the exit row on planes, if there is a seat available. When I do, I always take out the safety instructions and review them, even though I know them by heart. One time, I was doing that and a flight attendant saw me doing it. She came over and said, "You know, you're the first person I've ever seen look at that card. Thank you!"
I read package inserts for every prescription I receive, too. I have read the insert for a couple of my flu shots, too. I'm a reader of things.
Aristus
(65,985 posts)If they do, I will be more than happy to show it to them.
MineralMan
(146,116 posts)They'll be surprised, but they'll hand you the insert. I've never read it before getting the shot, though.
Hermit-The-Prog
(32,892 posts)On the other hand, I have owner's manuals for devices that no longer exist. (And I've read them). There should be something profound to be gleaned from a manual outlasting a tool, but it's just more clutter in my house and garage.
MineralMan
(146,116 posts)Everyone says that.
Claritie Pixie
(2,199 posts)MMR package insert:
https://www.fda.gov/media/75191/download
Not that they'll be able to understand clinical research and clinical pharmacology anyway
MineralMan
(146,116 posts)They're not hard to find.
Some pharma companies print the entire consumer insert in their magazine ads, as well. The makers of Nexplanon, the contraceptive implant, include it in their ads in major magazines, taking up a couple of full pages in the magazine. I've always found that interesting.
Here's a link to Merck's patient information for Nexplanon:
https://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/n/nexplanon/nexplanon_ppi.pdf
womanofthehills
(8,547 posts)ck4829
(34,905 posts)Buckeyeblue
(5,490 posts)ck4829
(34,905 posts)rainin
(3,010 posts)That doesn't make a fun punching bag though. Carry on.
Aristus
(65,985 posts)So why they haven't folded their tents and gone home, I can't quite figure out.
rainin
(3,010 posts)Have we determined scientifically that more than 30 doses, not counting annual flu shots, is safer than the 6 I took as a child? Are children more well than they were when we took 6? It's possible the issue is more complex than some would have us believe.
Aristus
(65,985 posts)It's a process.
We're the tip of a very long spear. The spear consists of thousands and thousands of people who get up every day and try to use their extensive training and experience to make the medical profession better, safer, more efficient, and productive of improved clinical outcomes. That's from the molecular biologists doing the important research into infectious diseases and the immunizations that can prevent them, to the lab technicians producing the vaccines, to the researchers testing them, to the clinical providers administering them.
It's fun to pretend we're all part of some dastardly conspiracy to wipe out humanity, one patient at a time, twirling our Snidely Whiplash moustaches and rubbing our hands gleefully all the while. But it doesn't reflect reality, and the reason and logic that help one negotiate reality safely and confidently.
If it helps, next time you're getting in to your car, take a few moments to ponder whether the assembly worker at the automotive plant twisted that nut as tightly as he should have, or if the forger of that gear reduction box really knew what he was doing. If you find this makes your day needlessly cumbersome, and that it's more rational to expect that your car was made my competent professionals, then spare the same thought for us. Sure, the car thing doesn't have the same Jenny McCarthy-level of social media sexiness of the immunization issue. But the bedrock principle is the same.
Eventually, 'concern' just comes across as brainless douchebaggery.
rainin
(3,010 posts)Vaccines are tested. I simply noted that they haven't been tested together. Nor have they been tested against the earlier vaccine schedules, like those of us who were growing up in the 60's.
I can tell you are proud of your job and believe your education prepared you to know more than the rest of us. Try not to be defensive. Defensive people sometimes forget the topic and start accusing people of brainless douchebaggery. Plus, it would be especially hard to accept any information that contradicts one's work, especially if it means they might be harming children. No one wants to think they missed something.
So I understand your defensiveness, but it isn't helpful here.
Aristus
(65,985 posts)That's kind of what education is about.
This isn't defensiveness. The whole game-plan of the anti-vaxx movement is to put the knowledgeable professionals on the defensive. So good on you for trying. You're following the game-plan.
If there's one thing likely to anger me (rather than put me on the defensive) it's to accuse me of harming children through neglect and carelessness. I know that's also part of the game-plan. Vaccines do not harm children, and it is unethical to insinuate that they do. Since we're on the subject of trained professionals, it might help to know that the progenitor of the anti-vaxx movement falsified his research into vaccines, has been discredited by the medical profession, and was stripped of his license. In a movie or a TV show, this might be shown as evidence that "The conspiracy runs deeper than you know..." But in real life, it just means that the anti-vaxx movement is built on fraudulent principles.
Fortunately, we trained and educated professionals listen to other trained and educated professionals, rather than listening to internet trouble-makers.
rainin
(3,010 posts)Medical professionals who engage in attacks rather than discussion sound more like pharmaceutical shills.
Maybe someday, society will re-evaluate its blind faith in the current vaccine schedule. Until then, I'll continue to ask people if they think we should call on scientists to verify the safety of so many vaccines on young children. I'd like to see independent studies that demonstrate the safety of so many. I'd prefer we not experiment on our children. Maybe someday, common sense will prevail.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)"The vaccines aren't tested together"
The reaction to demonstrated expertise that it somehow = saying that "Doctors are infallible."
Calling those who disagree with you "pharmaceutical shills."
"Experimenting on our children."
You have made statements and cited statistics without providing any sources for them. That seems to indicate that you are reluctant to reveal the sources that you trust.
It's easy to include links to your sources, and that will prove those with doubts wrong.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)womanofthehills
(8,547 posts)because they only have a short time each year to figure out what strains to use. If you go online and type in vaccine injury lawyers, it's almost scary - some lawyers list the cases they have won. What's scary is that there are hundreds of vaccine injury lawyers out there - so business can't be that bad.
rainin
(3,010 posts)We have no scientific studies saying the current schedule is safer than what I had, around 6 vaccines.
womanofthehills
(8,547 posts)He was sick for three months and totally stopped talking. We were freaked - but he's fine now.
Some of my friends will only give their child one vaccine at a time - a smart move I think.
obamanut2012
(25,869 posts)You have proved on other threads you are anti vaccine, and drink beet juice to "stay healthy," so be honest about your agenda on this thread.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Experts say the findings offer reassurance, which comes against a backdrop of parent concerns about their children's vaccines that in recent years have been fanned by the antivaccine movement. Researchers from Kaiser Permanente and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported their findings in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).
In 2002, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) examined questions about whether getting multiple vaccinations could impair developing immune systems, which led them to reject, among other considerations, that exposure to multiple vaccines caused nontargeted diseases. The agency noted, however, that a relationship between multiple vaccinations and the risk of nontargeted infections was biologically plausible.
Since then, researchers have looked at questions related to multiple vaccinations and autoimmunity and allergy, but little work has been done to examine the association between multiple vaccine and nontargeted infections, and none involved the current US childhood vaccine schedule.
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2018/03/study-finds-no-immune-overload-us-kids-vaccine-schedule
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2673970
IOM scientists conducted the study based on a request from the Department of Health and Human Service (HHS) over concerns about the quantity and timing of vaccines. The immunization schedule recommended by federal health officials is designed to protect kids from 14 different pathogens at a time when they're most vulnerable to the diseases.
The IOM noted in its 175-page report that more than 90% of kids enter kindergarten with most of the recommended immunizations, but some parents have aired worries that the vaccine schedule is too "crowded" and have asked doctors for more flexible immunization timing to space out or delay some of the doses. According to current recommendations, children may receive up to 24 immunizations by their second birthday and up to five injections during a single office visit.
The IOM said the study is its first to specifically explore the entire child vaccination schedule. The group examined the scientific literature and sought feedback from several stakeholder groups, including researchers, advocacy groups, parents, the public, and federal agencies.
They found no links between adverse events and the immunization schedule and said that the federal government's existing safety systems provide further confidence that the current schedule is safe.
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2013/01/iom-study-finds-child-vaccine-schedule-safe
So, apparently it is safe. And I certainly made sure my son got the vaccines not available to me. I don't want him to get shingles, or for a partner to contract HPV from him.
Do you have any sources that say that the current schedule is less safe than the schedule that didn't include those? I'm not sure that there's a continuum for "safe" past the point of "safe."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK206938/
Perhaps you can clarify? I mean, wearing two seat belts doesn't make one more safe than wearing one.
https://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-history/developments-by-year
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)I'm interested in what your sources are.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)safety testing.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26371192
Vaccines can generally be co-administered (i.e. more than one vaccine given at different sites during the same visit). Recommendations that explicitly endorse co-administration are indicated in the table, however, lack of an explicit co-administration recommendation does not imply that the vaccine cannot be co-administered; further, there are no recommendations against co-administration.
Summary of WHO Position Papers Recommendations for Routine Immunization
So that's one talking point that you don't need to believe anymore.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)That is defensive. And it's not helpful either.
You can disagree without being disagreeable.
― Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Iwasthere
(3,135 posts)Doctors have prescribed a myriad of pills for depression, and expensive ones. Come to find out they are no better than placebos, and even cause harm. So many suicides Flu vaccine success rates are dismal. My immune system if far greater than the avg vaxer, I refuse to run the risk of compromising my body, there is no good reason, and I am no threat. Also herd immunity is a bogus argument. You have to reach 95% participation for herd success. Because of people with compromised systems that is an impossibility. So where does that leave us. So much fear.
Response to Iwasthere (Reply #14)
Post removed
rainin
(3,010 posts)They are no more effective than a placebo in mild to moderate depression. The commenter is correct.
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)it is not correct.
rainin
(3,010 posts)They prescribed antidepressants (and still do) despite research that clearly shows it's ineffective in any group other than those with severe depression.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)And who has stated that doctors are infallible?
Demsrule86
(68,217 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)ck4829
(34,905 posts)LuckyCharms
(17,236 posts)my own personal experience which says otherwise?
obamanut2012
(25,869 posts)Let alone LEGIT sources.
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)Till you dont.
And cut the bullshit about anti-depression medicine. My significant other suffered from depression on and off till her doctor found a medication that worked for her. And it changed her life and our lives for the better. That was 24 years ago!
You dont know the fuck what you are talking about. Stereotypical internet doctor. You have all the answers. And if one internet site does not confirm your bias you can always find another that does. And you call that science!
Dont talk to me about anti-depression drugs bring bogus. They may have saved my significant others life.
Jesus, this bullshit pisses me off.
Hermit-The-Prog
(32,892 posts)Your 95% participation argument falls apart quite easily.
obamanut2012
(25,869 posts)Yet another thread you and the DU anti-vaxxers are staining with unscientific falsehoods and half-truths.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,083 posts)It was achieved for several vaccinations in many countries for many years.
And to call herd immunity "a bogus argument" is to completely misunderstand reality. It's those with the compromised systems who need herd immunity to be achieved, because they can't be personally protected. Yours is the argument of "survival of the fittest - leave the weak behind". We need compassion, not resignation to illness and death.
Drahthaardogs
(6,843 posts)Particularly well. What you are saying makes no sense
obamanut2012
(25,869 posts)womanofthehills
(8,547 posts)Nothing is black and white. Most people do fine with the flu shot - but the government has paid out over $4,000,000,000 for vaccine injury so improvements can be made to the shots.
https://www.hrsa.gov/sites/default/files/hrsa/vaccine-compensation/data/data-statistics-october-2019.pdf
Aristus
(65,985 posts)For everyone who is not allergic, vaccination is of paramount importance.
Anyway, an allergic reaction is due to the patient's physiological response to the vaccine, not any inherent property of the vaccine itself.
rainin
(3,010 posts)Aristus
(65,985 posts)for not getting vaccinated.
Anything other objection is graduate-level shitheadedness.
It is in order to protect the allergic from otherwise vaccine-preventable diseases that the rest of us should get immunized.
rainin
(3,010 posts)You can disagree without being disagreeable.
― Ruth Bader Ginsburg
TidalWave46
(2,061 posts)Although the intelligent manner in which she does so might fly over the heads of some.
Aristus
(65,985 posts)You're peddling dangerous misinformation.
You want me to be polite to you? Stop being an anti-vaxxer.
rainin
(3,010 posts)My children are fully vaccinated with all state mandated vaccines (includes quite a few more than I had).
To be clear, you're accusing me of "peddling misinformation" for wanting the safety of all the vaccines in the vaccine schedule to be studied as a whole.
And yes, of course I think polite conversation is better than name calling. There are lots of people here who prefer to be interact with polite people. I enjoy polite conversation with polite people.
Yet, mentioning studying vaccines makes people angry. I find that more than a little interesting.
Aristus
(65,985 posts)You think vaccines aren't studied to a fair-thee-well? For this precise reason?
You think vaccine manufacturers just collect some storm-drain runoff or something and say: "Eh, good enough." and pronounce it a vaccine?
There are people who devote their entire professional lives to studying the safety and efficacy of vaccines.
If all you want to do is shed a little sunshine on the good work they do, then thank you. They deserve it.
But to suggest that it isn't done is a rather feeble brand of trolling...
rainin
(3,010 posts)I've looked, but if you know of research studying the effects of all the vaccines on the current schedule, it's time to put up. I've looked and concluded it doesn't exist.
Yelling back that vaccine manufacturers aren't to be questioned isn't an argument.
I think you know that, so you must be doing this for some other reason.
The only thing I'm compensating for is the fact that I still get patients who refuse the vaccine for any reason other than allergy. That is a reasonable form of compensation.
This isn't attacking. It's defending. Defending modern allopathic medicine against people who think we should return to the days of horse-dung poultices, bleeding, and blistering. Medical professionals are a defensive bulwark against scientific ignorance.
rainin
(3,010 posts)If I were as committed as you to a point of view, I'd have dozens of studies at the ready.
One study please that shows that the current vaccine schedule taken together, as mandated is safe.
One study please that shows that the current vaccine schedule is as safe as the schedule in 1960 when I was a child.
waiting...waiting...waiting...waiting...waiting...waiting...waiting...waiting...waiting...waiting...
Aristus
(65,985 posts)Therefor, I'm 'compensating.'
And it's a pretty common debating tactic to insist that the other guy do the research. But here's the thing. I don't need any convincing. And you're the one who says there's no research out there.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Study finds no immune overload for US kids' vaccine schedule
Experts say the findings offer reassurance, which comes against a backdrop of parent concerns about their children's vaccines that in recent years have been fanned by the antivaccine movement. Researchers from Kaiser Permanente and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported their findings in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).
In 2002, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) examined questions about whether getting multiple vaccinations could impair developing immune systems, which led them to reject, among other considerations, that exposure to multiple vaccines caused nontargeted diseases. The agency noted, however, that a relationship between multiple vaccinations and the risk of nontargeted infections was biologically plausible.
Since then, researchers have looked at questions related to multiple vaccinations and autoimmunity and allergy, but little work has been done to examine the association between multiple vaccine and nontargeted infections, and none involved the current US childhood vaccine schedule.
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2018/03/study-finds-no-immune-overload-us-kids-vaccine-schedule
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2673970
IOM scientists conducted the study based on a request from the Department of Health and Human Service (HHS) over concerns about the quantity and timing of vaccines. The immunization schedule recommended by federal health officials is designed to protect kids from 14 different pathogens at a time when they're most vulnerable to the diseases.
The IOM noted in its 175-page report that more than 90% of kids enter kindergarten with most of the recommended immunizations, but some parents have aired worries that the vaccine schedule is too "crowded" and have asked doctors for more flexible immunization timing to space out or delay some of the doses. According to current recommendations, children may receive up to 24 immunizations by their second birthday and up to five injections during a single office visit.
The IOM said the study is its first to specifically explore the entire child vaccination schedule. The group examined the scientific literature and sought feedback from several stakeholder groups, including researchers, advocacy groups, parents, the public, and federal agencies.
They found no links between adverse events and the immunization schedule and said that the federal government's existing safety systems provide further confidence that the current schedule is safe.
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2013/01/iom-study-finds-child-vaccine-schedule-safe
Now, clearly, not getting chicken pox or HPV or measles is safer - both for the person who is getting the vaccine and the people around them who cannot get those vaccines for medical reasons - undergoing chemo, infants too young to get the full schedule, those with HIV.
So to say that there needs to be a study that states that getting those vaccines is safer than not getting them, requires a more specific definition of "safe." Perhaps you'd like to clarify that for us?
https://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-history/developments-by-year
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)And yes, there is a study...
Study finds no immune overload for US kids' vaccine schedule
Experts say the findings offer reassurance, which comes against a backdrop of parent concerns about their children's vaccines that in recent years have been fanned by the antivaccine movement. Researchers from Kaiser Permanente and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported their findings in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).
In 2002, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) examined questions about whether getting multiple vaccinations could impair developing immune systems, which led them to reject, among other considerations, that exposure to multiple vaccines caused nontargeted diseases. The agency noted, however, that a relationship between multiple vaccinations and the risk of nontargeted infections was biologically plausible.
Since then, researchers have looked at questions related to multiple vaccinations and autoimmunity and allergy, but little work has been done to examine the association between multiple vaccine and nontargeted infections, and none involved the current US childhood vaccine schedule.
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2018/03/study-finds-no-immune-overload-us-kids-vaccine-schedule
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2673970
Perhaps looking further than the sources that you rely on might be helpful.
womanofthehills
(8,547 posts)Now with Trump in power, eliminating all the people who check for safety of our food, drugs, air, water - Who is actually checking vaccine safety? Do you know?
GalaxoSmithKline - who makes Flublok just recalled Zantac.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-gsk-heartburn-zantac/gsk-recalls-popular-heartburn-drug-zantac-globally-after-cancer-scare-idUSKBN1WN1SL
Merck who makes vaccines recalled Vioxx
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/6192603/ns/health-arthritis/t/report-vioxx-linked-thousands-deaths/#.XaE5FiV7mWY
etc.............. the other vaccine companies have had problems too. I am for safer vaccines, not anti vax.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)You are not studying vaccines.
So, whats your day job? Study vaccines for a living? Because lots of honorable people do.
ck4829
(34,905 posts)obamanut2012
(25,869 posts)And stated as fact the scientific impossibility that vaccines caused a relative to not speak for three months. You are against public safety for some reason, and it is astounding you and others do.
Skinner, etal really should have banned all anti vaxx nonsense years
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)here.
DU rules, thou shalt adhere to the majority opinion.
Turin_C3PO
(13,574 posts)It lets me know who the anti-science idiots on this site are.
On edit: Im not talking about most in this thread, Im talking about the true nutters.
Aristus
(65,985 posts)One can have a contrary opinion to gravity if one chooses. I challenge that person to jump off a 100-story building, thumb their noses at science all the way down, and see what happens when they get to the bottom.
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)The OP is preaching to the choir. It is meant to attack anyone with contrary opinion.
It is not informational.
Aristus
(65,985 posts)life-saving preventive care.
Shutting such people down isn't bullying, it's heroism.
Playing the victim card on this doesn't work with me.
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)Aristus
(65,985 posts)Disease and the prevention of disease are not matters of opinion. This isn't summer camp; it's not important that everyone gets to play. This is a matter for trained scientists. Somebody with a keyboard and an internet connection doesn't get to weigh in just because he or she has an opinion. Validity isn't measured by the loudness of one's voice, but by the veracity of the science.
The 'science' behind the anti-vaxx movement was discredited years ago.
I can respect devotion to a cause. But if someone is that devoted to a cause, they would be better utilized as a volunteer or an advocate for things that matter: an organization to protect abused and neglected children, a shelter for victims of domestic violence, charities for the homeless, HIV advocacy, etc, etc. I don't want people with such persistence and devotion to a cause to just spin their wheels helplessly.
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)It certainly is not a discussion or a debate.
It was posted so a bunch of people can pat themselves on the back in hope someone will disagree with the herd. Then the fun starts. All gang up on that one to bully them.
Aristus
(65,985 posts)The whole point of this is that there shouldn't be disagreement on this issue. Anymore than there should be disagreement over whether the sun comes up in the morning.
The whole purpose of the anti-vaxx movement isn't to right some institutional wrong; it's to muddy the waters, to rile people up, and to get the spotlight focused on people who have seemingly nothing else to offer.
The day the anti-vaxxers hang it up and go to lunch, I'll stop these threads.
wasupaloopa
(4,516 posts)will post something about flu shots .
The two types of replies appear. One is people saying they got a flu shot. The other rails about anti-vac people.
All replies agree with one or the other or both. Its like a herd instinct. The official DU opinion is repeated over and over like reciting a creed.
Everyone hopes that a contrary post shows up. Then the bullying starts. It is fun. You get to tell people how knowledgable you rare on the subject.
Without the contrary post there is no real information passed on. Just the herd agreeing with the herd.
Just wait this afternoon it will be repeated.
This happens with other subjects also. White privilege is a good one. The topic is different but the mechanics are the same.
I have been watching this for years.
The justification for two of these yesterday was that these posts remind people to get a flu shot,
rainin
(3,010 posts)obamanut2012
(25,869 posts)You are your cohorts are wrong, and on the wrong side of science and public safety, and you really all should be rather ashamed of yourselves for peddling this.
obamanut2012
(25,869 posts)It is honestly bizarre you think it is.
Wow.
Mariana
(14,830 posts)Imagine that.
NickB79
(19,063 posts)Antivaxxers are on the same fucking level as climate chscienceniers, Moon landing deniers and flat earthers.
ismnotwasm
(41,885 posts)And the people who will die. This year. Possible this moment. Dead. No coming back, and often suffering greatly prior to death. Because assholes cant be bothered to protect others out of dumbassery.
We have a screening tool prior to offering vaccines, that takes into account things like allergies and GuillainBarré.
I understand exceptions, I understand the topic is not not black and white.
But goddamn its hard to watch a patient develop something like ARDS because they got the flu, and know it was preventable.
Quixote1818
(28,896 posts)Carry on.
ck4829
(34,905 posts)obamanut2012
(25,869 posts)AT BEST.
ck4829
(34,905 posts)jpak
(41,724 posts)Fuck.
Them.
yup
Initech
(99,881 posts)Initech
(99,881 posts)Last edited Fri Oct 11, 2019, 05:36 PM - Edit history (1)
We need this guy everywhere:
ck4829
(34,905 posts)SoCalNative
(4,613 posts)Oh, you mean that thing that I take out of all of my scrips and immediately toss in the trash?
Ms. Toad
(33,896 posts)Fighting requests for informaiton, and ridiculing people who make them, just makes it seem as if you're trying to hide something.
Aristus
(65,985 posts)They're all over the internet.
I ridicule anti-vaxxers because their views are ridiculous.
Ms. Toad
(33,896 posts)No need to set up a straw man and knock it down.
ETA - so I think I've tracked down the concern being raised - and it, too, can be addressed simply and without ridicule.
Your assertion that the claim is about missing inserts is (from anything I can find) inaccurate. The only concern I have been able to find regards missing sections from the insert.
Inserts are mandated to include certain information, if applicable. There are 1-3 sections missing from Merck inserts this year. The sections apparently aren't applicable. Giving the concerns a quick glance, the issue seems to be whether absence = lack of information as to those sections or absence = no reason for concern. Explaining which it is to your patients would require very little effort to explain to them in a civil manner - and an explanation would be far more likely to convince them to have the vaccine than ridicule would.
Mariana
(14,830 posts)The anti-vaxxers who claim they aren't available are lying.
Ms. Toad
(33,896 posts)I was suggesting that the appropriate response if someone is making that claim is to respond by providing it, not ridiculing them for wanting it.
Voltaire2
(12,511 posts)The intent was to spread fear uncertainty and doubt by claiming that the insert is being deliberately withheld.
And I think you know that.
Ms. Toad
(33,896 posts)But - I did a quick search and did not come up with any such allegations, so it seems to be a strawman morphed from a questions that was raised about gaps in the insert disclosures, which is a different issue. It's much easier to ridicule an allegation that inserts are being intentionally withheld than it is to have a rational dicussion about why certain mandatory disclosures are absent from the inserts (1-3 from Merck's for this year).
Had I been the attorney who reviewed the inserts, I would have suggested that all mandatory disclosures be listed - with a brief explanation for silence on the provisions that are inapplicable - explaining why they were omitted.
Mariana
(14,830 posts)Ms. Toad
(33,896 posts)Mariana
(14,830 posts)I read it that the OP is ridiculing the people who claim the inserts aren't being made available to read.
Ms. Toad
(33,896 posts)Especially since nothing I can find suggest that is really the claim.
And, if that really is the case - as I suggested in my first response: The more mature response - that is more likely to encourage poeple to be vaccinated - is to hand people who are making that claim (if any really are) an insert.
progressoid
(49,758 posts)Aristus
(65,985 posts)progressoid
(49,758 posts)If I had, I would have to opportunity to google every ingredient before I let them stick that needle in her. And with my extensive high school chemistry background, I would have seen the warning signs.
Voltaire2
(12,511 posts)And good luck getting her to eat kale.
progressoid
(49,758 posts)We were only giving her essential oils. The addition of kale should help immensely!
Demsrule86
(68,217 posts)UNDOUBTEDLY...HOW COULD YOU? HEHEHE.
Archae
(46,246 posts)Parents
5 children
7 grandchildren
7 great-grandchildren
2 great-great grandchildren
All had vaccinations.
Not ONE has autism. Not one!
How do I know all this?
It's my family.
I am one of the 5 children.
Anti-vaxxers are total assholes.
They follow a quack who faked a study to make money. (Andrew Wakefield)
Aristus
(65,985 posts)Of course not, because apparently (and don't quote me on this) there is no research.
Or if there is, it has been suppressed by the Deep State...
I know you have this battle daily at work.
Sorry it follows you home on DU.
Almost cocktail time!
Aristus
(65,985 posts)Rough week...
But largely a success. I've only had one vaccine refusal this week (out of twenty or so) that I wasn't able to overcome.
aikoaiko
(34,113 posts)I'll be honest I find that practice dubious in its logic.
Demsrule86
(68,217 posts)shot and no they are not autistic...but now there is an acellular version they will try.
ck4829
(34,905 posts)Skittles
(152,918 posts)but it still shocks me when I see it on DU