4 ms·

Seems your condition is very different from that of a newborn baby with an under developed and fragile immune system, who's mothers are fed mistruths about how

by orf 8y ago

Seems your condition is very different from that of a newborn baby with an under developed and fragile immune system, who's mothers are fed mistruths about how harmful vaccines are. I don't see how your story relates in any way about harmful anti-vax groups (and vaccines in general) other than "I got some unrelated help at one point". So yes, we can absolutely be happy they are being demonitized. That being said I am sorry that your doctor treated you like that and I am glad you did manage to help yourself.

jorgesborges 8y ago
I think there's a relationship but it's tenuously stated. Anti-vax is in part due to an erosion of trust in our experts and institutions. This case is a prime example. You have people that have been poisoned for decades by their government. It's no surprise to me that a person who can't trust the safety of her own drinking water is reluctant to receive government-sponsored injections.
- DoreenMichele 8y ago
  It's no surprise to me that a person who can't trust the safety of her own drinking water is reluctant to receive government-sponsored injections. I'm not an antivaxxer. I've had my vaccines, though I no longer get annual flu shots and lots of people are very quick to demonize me as an antivaxxer over that detail. it's tenuously stated. I've tried to improve the clarity of that one paragraph in my above remark.
  - jorgesborges 8y ago
    Sorry to hear about your circumstances and I wish you luck. Just wanted to say my intention wasn't to criticize you personally or to make any assumptions. I think it's unfair how you're being flagged. I'll try to clarify my point as well for anyone else: We should probably be more open to discussing the experiences that motivate anti-vaxers rather than attacking or dismissing them in a way that serves to strengthen their convictions.
  - poizan42 8y ago
    > though I no longer get annual flu shots and lots of people are very quick to demonize me as an antivaxxer over that detail. I assume you are american? Here on the other side of the pond (I'm in Denmark) the flu shot is only being recommended for weakened and old people and is not generally something that people get. Translated from https://www.ssi.dk/vaccinationer/influenzavaccination/sporgsmal-og-svar-om-influenzavaccination https://www.ssi.dk/vaccinationer/influenzavaccination/sporgs...: > Why is vaccination not recommended for everyone? > Vaccination against influenza is given for the prevention of serious influenza disease or complications. In younger, healthy adults, vaccination will also prevent disease caused by the specific influenza strains in the vaccine. However, influenza does not pose a serious threat to the health of younger healthy people.
    - rsync 8y ago
      "the flu shot is only being recommended for weakened and old people and is not generally something that people get." This is correct and normal. The influenza shot is for specific populations of immune-compromised people. Normal, healthy children and adults do not need the influenza shot. The influenza shot has nothing to do with the (ridiculous) anti-vaccine "debate". It does not belong in the same conversation as, for instance, the MMR or whooping cough vaccines, etc.
    - DoreenMichele 8y ago
      I assume you are american? Here on the other side of the pond (I'm in Denmark) the flu shot is only being recommended for weakened and old people and is not generally something that people get. I happen to be American, yes. But, I think we have the same policy here. However, given my diagnosis, it is recommended for people like me. I handle my vulnerability to infection by working from home, avoiding large crowds and so forth. (I can't remember the last time I had the flu.) Correction: We used to have the same policy here. From the CDC website: CDC recommends annual influenza vaccination for everyone 6 months and older https://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/vaccination/index.htm https://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/vaccination/index.htm When I was growing up, vaccination levels were talked about in terms of success. "We have successfully vaccinated 90 percent of people." These days, they are talked about in terms of failure. "We have failed to vaccinate 10 percent of people." This is often followed up by classifying that last 10 percent as antivaxxers, nutters, holdouts, etc. The reality is that there can be legitimate medical reasons why one chooses to not vaccinate. But this has become such a politicized topic that such people tend to get lumped in with "crazy antivaxxers." Having spent time in the antivax community, I feel they largely exist because of that. If families with a known history of problems or simply personal concerns had their choices respected without so much public outcry and so many strangers butting into their (HIPAA protected) medical choices, I think you would probably see a lot less antivax propaganda. People who feel that vaccines are a problem for them and their kids would handle it a lot more quietly. FWIW, I get demonized by both camps. You can't currently have a moderate position on this topic. Antivaxxers hate me and vilify me just as much as anti-antivaxxers.
save_ferris 8y ago
Embracing the anti-vax movement because the standard healthcare system has failed this individual isn't something I considered before, but it makes a lot of sense. Our healthcare system is expensive, difficult to navigate, and the quality of care is wildly inconsistent. I'm by no means an anti-vaxer, but there have to be millions of Americans that are fed up with the state of healthcare and looking for an alternative.
- newnewpdro 8y ago
  > there have to be millions of Americans that are fed up with the state of healthcare and looking for an alternative. The popularity of Chiropractic "doctors" is another symptom of the same problem.
mindslight 8y ago
The person you're responding to is a decade-long HN commenter. Currently, her comment is sitting at [dead]. I myself don't necessarily agree with her chain of implications, but it was her journey. This isn't directly solely at your comment (but I can't respond to the top one directly, as it's dead) - When you latch on to it simply to beat the anti-anti-vax dead horse, you're doing everyone a disservice. IMHO if you want to know why online discourse has turned into such shite, then examine this. The noble ethos of judging words on their own merit has devolved into a tyranny - when you remove the "inertia" of individual reputation, each comment stands in isolation. Rather than seeing a larger pattern of a person being generally reasonable, giving the benefit of the doubt to a questionable comment, and perhaps extracting something worthwhile from it... we instead quickly judge it as "other" and move on.
- orf 8y ago
  The fact it is sitting at [dead] has nothing to do with my comment and the length of her time here on HN bears no relevance to this discussion. I fail to see why you can latch onto that fallacy and try to beat me with it as if it is my fault that her comment has been flagged. If it helps you sleep at night I have vouched for her comment as I don't think it should be flagged. If you would take the time to re-read my original comment, which was replying to a comment which has since been edited to be a bit more explicit about it's message, you would find that I'm simply questioning first what anti-vax groups have to do with the original post (or really her original comment at all) because vaxxines have nothing to do with her apparent on-base drinkwater poisoning, and also why her journey should make us feel bad about them being demonetized. Nobody is labelling her as "other" and moving on. I would say that you are pretty quick to judge my comment and to lambaste me for the ills you perceive, which is a bit ironic given the content of your message.
  - DoreenMichele 8y ago
    I didn't bother to reply to your original comment because I agree with mindslight's criticisms of it. I will reply here. Thank you for vouching for my comment. Seems your condition is very different from that of a newborn baby with an under developed and fragile immune system I'm going to guess you have no idea what my condition is, or didn't when you left that remark. I'm quite open about my diagnosis, while trying to not state the diagnosis too frequently because that tends to be drama, yet it is easily found if one wishes to find it. The assumption that my condition is very different from that of a newborn baby with an under developed and fragile immune system is very much in error. I have a genetic disorder that causes me to have a permanently impaired immune system. Standard treatment for it involves lots of vaccines and other strong drugs. I have gradually gotten better in part because I concluded that such a harsh approach may win the battle, but lose the war because the body is the battlefield. So when you bombard it perpetually with strong medications, you leave it a shelled out husk. Then doctors take credit for winning the latest battle against your latest infection by prescribing you such harsh drugs. When you die young, they don't take the blame for that (never mind the multi-page foldout warning you of possible harmful side effects for such drugs, especially when used frequently over a long period of time). Instead, they blame it on your genes when it comes to people like me. I fundamentally disagree with this current foundational tenet of Western medicine.

by orf 8y ago

jorgesborges 8y ago

I think there's a relationship but it's tenuously stated. Anti-vax is in part due to an erosion of trust in our experts and institutions. This case is a prime example. You have people that have been poisoned for decades by their government. It's no surprise to me that a person who can't trust the safety of her own drinking water is reluctant to receive government-sponsored injections.

DoreenMichele 8y ago
It's no surprise to me that a person who can't trust the safety of her own drinking water is reluctant to receive government-sponsored injections. I'm not an antivaxxer. I've had my vaccines, though I no longer get annual flu shots and lots of people are very quick to demonize me as an antivaxxer over that detail. it's tenuously stated. I've tried to improve the clarity of that one paragraph in my above remark.
- jorgesborges 8y ago
  Sorry to hear about your circumstances and I wish you luck. Just wanted to say my intention wasn't to criticize you personally or to make any assumptions. I think it's unfair how you're being flagged. I'll try to clarify my point as well for anyone else: We should probably be more open to discussing the experiences that motivate anti-vaxers rather than attacking or dismissing them in a way that serves to strengthen their convictions.
- poizan42 8y ago
  > though I no longer get annual flu shots and lots of people are very quick to demonize me as an antivaxxer over that detail. I assume you are american? Here on the other side of the pond (I'm in Denmark) the flu shot is only being recommended for weakened and old people and is not generally something that people get. Translated from https://www.ssi.dk/vaccinationer/influenzavaccination/sporgsmal-og-svar-om-influenzavaccination https://www.ssi.dk/vaccinationer/influenzavaccination/sporgs...: > Why is vaccination not recommended for everyone? > Vaccination against influenza is given for the prevention of serious influenza disease or complications. In younger, healthy adults, vaccination will also prevent disease caused by the specific influenza strains in the vaccine. However, influenza does not pose a serious threat to the health of younger healthy people.
  - rsync 8y ago
    "the flu shot is only being recommended for weakened and old people and is not generally something that people get." This is correct and normal. The influenza shot is for specific populations of immune-compromised people. Normal, healthy children and adults do not need the influenza shot. The influenza shot has nothing to do with the (ridiculous) anti-vaccine "debate". It does not belong in the same conversation as, for instance, the MMR or whooping cough vaccines, etc.
  - DoreenMichele 8y ago
    I assume you are american? Here on the other side of the pond (I'm in Denmark) the flu shot is only being recommended for weakened and old people and is not generally something that people get. I happen to be American, yes. But, I think we have the same policy here. However, given my diagnosis, it is recommended for people like me. I handle my vulnerability to infection by working from home, avoiding large crowds and so forth. (I can't remember the last time I had the flu.) Correction: We used to have the same policy here. From the CDC website: CDC recommends annual influenza vaccination for everyone 6 months and older https://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/vaccination/index.htm https://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/vaccination/index.htm When I was growing up, vaccination levels were talked about in terms of success. "We have successfully vaccinated 90 percent of people." These days, they are talked about in terms of failure. "We have failed to vaccinate 10 percent of people." This is often followed up by classifying that last 10 percent as antivaxxers, nutters, holdouts, etc. The reality is that there can be legitimate medical reasons why one chooses to not vaccinate. But this has become such a politicized topic that such people tend to get lumped in with "crazy antivaxxers." Having spent time in the antivax community, I feel they largely exist because of that. If families with a known history of problems or simply personal concerns had their choices respected without so much public outcry and so many strangers butting into their (HIPAA protected) medical choices, I think you would probably see a lot less antivax propaganda. People who feel that vaccines are a problem for them and their kids would handle it a lot more quietly. FWIW, I get demonized by both camps. You can't currently have a moderate position on this topic. Antivaxxers hate me and vilify me just as much as anti-antivaxxers.

save_ferris 8y ago

Embracing the anti-vax movement because the standard healthcare system has failed this individual isn't something I considered before, but it makes a lot of sense. Our healthcare system is expensive, difficult to navigate, and the quality of care is wildly inconsistent. I'm by no means an anti-vaxer, but there have to be millions of Americans that are fed up with the state of healthcare and looking for an alternative.

newnewpdro 8y ago
> there have to be millions of Americans that are fed up with the state of healthcare and looking for an alternative. The popularity of Chiropractic "doctors" is another symptom of the same problem.

mindslight 8y ago

The person you're responding to is a decade-long HN commenter. Currently, her comment is sitting at [dead]. I myself don't necessarily agree with her chain of implications, but it was her journey. This isn't directly solely at your comment (but I can't respond to the top one directly, as it's dead) - When you latch on to it simply to beat the anti-anti-vax dead horse, you're doing everyone a disservice. IMHO if you want to know why online discourse has turned into such shite, then examine this. The noble ethos of judging words on their own merit has devolved into a tyranny - when you remove the "inertia" of individual reputation, each comment stands in isolation. Rather than seeing a larger pattern of a person being generally reasonable, giving the benefit of the doubt to a questionable comment, and perhaps extracting something worthwhile from it... we instead quickly judge it as "other" and move on.

orf 8y ago
The fact it is sitting at [dead] has nothing to do with my comment and the length of her time here on HN bears no relevance to this discussion. I fail to see why you can latch onto that fallacy and try to beat me with it as if it is my fault that her comment has been flagged. If it helps you sleep at night I have vouched for her comment as I don't think it should be flagged. If you would take the time to re-read my original comment, which was replying to a comment which has since been edited to be a bit more explicit about it's message, you would find that I'm simply questioning first what anti-vax groups have to do with the original post (or really her original comment at all) because vaxxines have nothing to do with her apparent on-base drinkwater poisoning, and also why her journey should make us feel bad about them being demonetized. Nobody is labelling her as "other" and moving on. I would say that you are pretty quick to judge my comment and to lambaste me for the ills you perceive, which is a bit ironic given the content of your message.
- DoreenMichele 8y ago
  I didn't bother to reply to your original comment because I agree with mindslight's criticisms of it. I will reply here. Thank you for vouching for my comment. Seems your condition is very different from that of a newborn baby with an under developed and fragile immune system I'm going to guess you have no idea what my condition is, or didn't when you left that remark. I'm quite open about my diagnosis, while trying to not state the diagnosis too frequently because that tends to be drama, yet it is easily found if one wishes to find it. The assumption that my condition is very different from that of a newborn baby with an under developed and fragile immune system is very much in error. I have a genetic disorder that causes me to have a permanently impaired immune system. Standard treatment for it involves lots of vaccines and other strong drugs. I have gradually gotten better in part because I concluded that such a harsh approach may win the battle, but lose the war because the body is the battlefield. So when you bombard it perpetually with strong medications, you leave it a shelled out husk. Then doctors take credit for winning the latest battle against your latest infection by prescribing you such harsh drugs. When you die young, they don't take the blame for that (never mind the multi-page foldout warning you of possible harmful side effects for such drugs, especially when used frequently over a long period of time). Instead, they blame it on your genes when it comes to people like me. I fundamentally disagree with this current foundational tenet of Western medicine.