More Than 500 Economists Sign Letter Against Minimum Wage Hike

[kpmarine]

Again, is that because of the vaccine or the fact we wash our hands religiously, use super power strength cleaners on the floors of hospitals, etc. The downside is the germs mutate, and become resistant to any method of elimination. Why do you think those types of experiments which would prove me wrong aren't done?

Viruses require a living host to propagate, bacterium do not. Hence why we have effectively wiped smallpox and polio off the face of the vaccinated world while shit like the clap thrives.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Viruses require a living host to propagate, bacterium do not. Hence why we have effectively wiped smallpox and polio off the face of the vaccinated world while shit like the clap thrives.

This is their logic. You can have an isolated population of 100,000 people all of whom are vaccinated. One infected person comes into contact with an infected person. That person starts an epidemic of the very disease the population is vaccinated against. Then they say you wouldn't have gotten the disease if that infected person had been immunized too! They use some really fuck up logic there.

While I'm not saying there might be some benefit to the vaccination, does that benefit outweigh the risks from the reaction you can get from the vaccine itself? Along with the contamination protocols, is there really any need for the vaccine? Was the vaccine more effective when people didn't clean everything like a crazy mother fucker?

This is a good article. It states that diseases like polio don't need a vaccine, just like could be done with the common cold. Government is more concerned with the easy, not the most effective or safe. That's why the FDA states GRA (GENERALLY regarded as safe) for use of preservatives such as proprionic acid which Europe bans.

Thermisol is a GRA too, but again places like Europe ban it. The FDA tries to say it's not used, but it still has a wide usage as a preservative.

There are plenty of more effective means than a vaccine, but the government refuses because it's not cost effective. I know how to live off the land. If need be, I'm getting the fuck out of Dodge, not some retarded vaccine, which by then is too late anyway in the case of an emergency.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/13/health/research/13cold.html

 

[kpmarine]

This is their logic. You can have an isolated population of 100,000 people all of whom are vaccinated. One infected person comes into contact with an infected person. That person starts an epidemic of the very disease the population is vaccinated against. Then they say you wouldn't have gotten the disease if that infected person had been immunized too! They use some really fuck up logic there.

While I'm not saying there might be some benefit to the vaccination, does that benefit outweigh the risks from the reaction you can get from the vaccine itself? Along with the contamination protocols, is there really any need for the vaccine? Was the vaccine more effective when people didn't clean everything like a crazy mother fucker?

This is a good article. It states that diseases like polio don't need a vaccine, just like could be done with the common cold. Government is more concerned with the easy, not the most effective or safe. That's why the FDA states GRA (GENERALLY regarded as safe) for use of preservatives such as proprionic acid which Europe bans.

Thermisol is a GRA too, but again places like Europe ban it. The FDA tries to say it's not used, but it still has a wide usage as a preservative.

There are plenty of more effective means than a vaccine, but the government refuses because it's not cost effective. I know how to live off the land. If need be, I'm getting the fuck out of Dodge, not some retarded vaccine, which by then is too late anyway in the case of an emergency.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/13/health/research/13cold.html

Comparing a constantly mutating virus to the common cold? My goodness, you don't know how this works. Please, feel free to ask some third-rate celebrities how your children should be vaccinated. As we all know, that rabies vaccine pets get is a scam...

 

[twostrokenut]

Are you talking to me? That was my point. Just because you can't examine the economy in a petri dish, doesn't mean it ain't scientific. To even try could border on unethical behavior.

My bad canna I'm pretty high....so social "science" then as the largely unethical behavior?

 

[kpmarine]

My bad canna I'm pretty high....so social "science" then as the largely unethical behavior?

Gotta love
assumption. I don't recall Canna making that statement.

 

[twostrokenut]

Scientific means it has repeatable results within a controlled situation.

Our us economy? So the repeatable results are failures because the situation was controlled....and this is science...really?

 

[Canna Sylvan]

My bad canna I'm pretty high....so social "science" then as the largely unethical behavior?

I mean to satisfy the requirement some have regarding science, you'd need to do experiments which could possibly be unethical. So isn't it rather unfair that such an impossible requirement is required to make it a science?

I'm quite high too, bro.

 

[kpmarine]

Our us economy? So the repeatable results are failures because the situation was controlled....and this is science...really?

Failures are not repeatable evidence that immediately refutes something. The rest of it is basic English. Please feel free to consul a dictionary...

 

[kpmarine]

I mean to satisfy the requirement some have regarding science, you'd need to do experiments which could possibly be unethical. So isn't it rather unfair that such an impossible requirement is required to make it a science?

I'm quite high too, bro.

Red herring, and you are high as balls. Feel free to state an example though.

 

[twostrokenut]

Gotta love
assumption. I don't recall Canna making that statement.

How about now?

 

[kpmarine]

How about now?

Seeing as he precludes 'examinging something in a petri dish" (i.e. non-general circumstance) I leave it to you to prove a point.

 

[twostrokenut]

Failures are not repeatable evidence that immediately refutes something. The rest of it is basic English. Please feel free to consul a dictionary...

Its a complete failure to inflate the currency. Every time including this iteration.
Even iffs diss misspelled sum den leest deez coherant thoughts and Idont need a dictionary.

Cheeky fella.

 

[kpmarine]

How about now?

Wzay to consider the major viral implications instead of your dick, btw..

 

[kpmarine]

Its a complete failure to inflate the currency. Every time including this iteration.
Even iffs diss misspelled sum den leest deez coherant thoughts and Idont need a dictionary.

Cheeky fella.

I wasn't aware that immunization was an issue bound by currency.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Comparing a constantly mutating virus to the common cold? My goodness, you don't know how this works. Please, feel free to ask some third-rate celebrities how your children should be vaccinated. As we all know, that rabies vaccine pets get is a scam...

Way to read the article. It states no vaccine is required to fight the cold, the means in which a Rhinovirus attacks the body is thought to be equivalent with how Polio works in the same manner. If a drug is designed which prevents the Rhinovirus from having the ability to attack us, then that article is implying the same could be true of Polio.

Where did I state a rabies vaccine is a scam? A pet isn't a human. But again it proves my point. Preventing the animal from getting rabies, prevents rabies. Even though we'd be over doubly safe if we vaccinated us along with the pets!

Then there's this logic. If I nor my kids don't get vaccinated, but yours do, that reduces my risk, because you did along with your kids. So, while I don't know if vaccines truly work, nor do you. But, if they do work, thanks for risking yours and your kid's lives for the sake my kids are safer without worrying about the risks of the vaccine.

 

[kpmarine]

Way to read the article. It states no vaccine is required to fight the cold, the means in which a Rhinovirus attacks the body is thought to be equivalent with how Polio works in the same manner. If a drug is designed which prevents the Rhinovirus from having the ability to attack us, then that article is implying the same could be true of Polio.

Where did I state a rabies vaccine is a scam? A pet isn't a human. But again it proves my point. Preventing the animal from getting rabies, prevents rabies. Even though we'd be over doubly safe if we vaccinated us along with the pets!

Then there's this logic. If I nor my kids don't get vaccinated, but yours do, that reduces my risk, because you did along with your kids. So, while I don't know if vaccines truly work, nor do you. But, if they do work, thanks for risking yours and your kid's lives for the sake my kids are safer without worrying about the risks of the vaccine.

Ah, so the rabies virus is the same as polio, but rabies isn't the same as the common cold? I am honestly glad I don't have children yet, as I would likely do my best to remove your polio, smallpox,and TB infected children to their own "special" school.

The sad part is that they're only there because of the parental jack-assery.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Ah, so the rabies virus is the same as polio, but rabies isn't the same as the common cold? I am honestly glad I don't have children yet, as I would likely do my best to remove your polio, smallpox,and TB infected children to their own "special" school.

The sad part is that they're only there because of the parental jack-assery.

I never said that. I can only quote what's in the article.

The article states if a drug is found which eliminates the effects of the common cold, then even if a vaccine for the common cold were possible, it wouldn't be necessary. If Polio works in the same manner as the Rhinovirus, it would assume the same is possible for Polio. Now I don't know how Rabies works, but I don't see why something similar couldn't work too. Rabies usually attacks the nerves, while polio does so at a much rarer rate.

Another reason we don't vaccinate for rabies is because the vaccine for polio reacts negatively when both are administered. So that would be another reason to figure out a polio drug cure, rather than vaccine. The rabies vaccine companies would love that, they could then campaign in good conscience for human victims!

 

[kpmarine]

Rabies vaccine doesn't exist! You heard it here first!

 

[twostrokenut]

I wasn't aware that immunization was an issue bound by currency.

That's yours and cannas convo that's why the quote feature is nice.
I think you and I are agreeing economics aren't science per say.

Wzay to consider the major viral implications instead of your dick, btw..

On a side note I'm not drunk or anything though so I assume you think snoop talked in an attractive wzay(sexy perhaps) and chose to imitate....instead of suggesting a dictionary for you.

 

[kpmarine]

I never said that. I can only quote what's in the article.

The article states if a drug is found which eliminates the effects of the common cold, then even if a vaccine for the common cold were possible, it wouldn't be necessary. If Polio works in the same manner as the Rhinovirus, it would assume the same is possible for Polio. Now I don't know how Rabies works, but I don't see why something similar couldn't work too. Rabies usually attacks the nerves, while polio does so at a much rarer rate.

Another reason we don't vaccinate for rabies is because the vaccine for polio reacts negatively when both are administered. So that would be another reason to figure out a polio drug cure, rather than vaccine. The rabies vaccine companies would love that, they could then campaign in good conscience for human victims!

I hate you, but hope that your fuck-assery doesn't kill your children that you use as an extension of yourself....