Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“The CDC Studies you provaxxers support are also FLAWED”
All studies are flawed. some have greater flaws than others.
For example the “flaw” you keep repeating over and over and over about “needing a vaxxed vs unvaxxed study” Is pure 100% unadulterated grade a nonsense. It isnt a flaw at all.“Like that MMR – Sibling study which was NOT RANDOMIZED”
This was retrospective cohort study. IYou obviously dont know what that means. There is no randomization.
In short charts are gathered up then you look back at their exposures. The question is how generalizable the cohort is, and the answer in thsi case is very generelizable. The group t they looked out (cohort) has similar characteristics to the general population . And in thsi way it is comparableOn the otherhand, the Mawson study is nothing odf the sort. People self enrolled and got their friends to enroll .
“so Healthy User Bias hid the MMR Autism Link”
colorless green ideas sleep furiously. (This has exactly as much meaning as the sentence you constructed)“but you
don’t think that INVALIDATES the ProVax Studies! WHY?”
I dont think, source of funding automatically invalidates a study. You think that. So why do you accept this one ?
(I do think it raises questions, and should make you read it more carefulyl, and assure that the data is reliable and repeatable. If you want to repeat the JAMA study you can, the data is all there it is verifiable. If you want to repeat the Mawson study you cannot, the data was gotten by asking the parents who got vaccines. If a parent recalls differently then you get different results, yet another giant flaw in the Mawson study.)“The Mawson Study stated that a Larger Study should be done”
There is a guy on my street corner who states that the moon is made of green cheese and if we bring it to Earth no one will ever starve , but NASA adamantly refuses to check this theory out why?Also
you said ““partially vaccinated children have a higher autism rate then…fully unvaccinated.”what about the Philippine study?
“partially vaccinated children have a higher autism rate then fully vaccinated …Because of Healthy User Bias. ”
As I pointed out earlier, you dont understand “Healthy user bias”
Also, if it is due to a bias, then they DON’T have higher autism rate, just that a bias falsely makes it appear that they do.
Are you saying that partially vaccinated have a higher autism rate than nonvaccinated, or that they appear too, but that in fact you’d expect their autism rate to be the same“although their Autism was probably caused by the vaccines they received when their Pregnant Mothers were..”
Amazing, you are literally just making things up
“partially vaccinated children have a higher autism rate then…fully unvaccinated.”
what about the Philippine study?
As for your 11th “study ” the Mawson study.
It is not valid.
Here are some reasons why:
1. There was no randomization, people voluntarily signed up and recruited their friends
2. They did not look at medical records, they labeled people as vaccinated” or unvaccinated” based on the word of the mothers
3. This was not a real study “We did not set out to test a specific hypothesis about the association between vaccination and health” (You love making up “basic science” rules, having a hypothesis that you test is areal one that you need
4. What journal was this published in? Is it a reliable journal?
5. Who funded this study, you dont trust pharmaceutical, companies or the CDC, who funded this one?“partially vaccinated children belong in the partially vaccinated category.”
And how do their autism rates compare to the fully vaxxed? To the fully unvaxed?
“It is basic science that if you want to prove causality you do a comparison
like vaxxed vs unvaxxed”You are confusing basic science with fake science. In basic science, there is no such rule. In fake science there may be but I defer to your expertise.
“and it showed that unvaxxed have Waaaaaay Less”
I missed this study. You provided 10 so far that you misrepresented and or misunderstood. Which study are you referring to now?“No. But YOU wrote that it is the UNEDUCATED who don’t vaccinate.
Once again, you are 100% wrong.”Nope I said uneducated, unintelligent and those who dont care about their kids.
“There are “confounding factors” in every study – yet the CDC does them anyway!”
Yes. So why do another?
“it wouldn’t prove to your that vaccines raise risk of autism?”
PROVE? No. Though it would create doubt. Which we would weigh against the dozens and dozens of studies showing the opposite.Oh and yet again you didnt answer my question
Here it us again:So what do you make of a partially vaccinated individual? which category does he go into?
Also lishitascha, how does his/her risk of autism compare to those you label “Vaccinated” ? and to those you label “unvaccinated”?doomsday
“My definition has been consistent.
Vaccinated = Vaccinated per CDC schedule.
Unvaccinated = 100% unvaccinated.”So what do you make of a partially vaccinated individual? which category does he go into?
Also lishitascha, how does his/her risk of autism compare to those you label “Vaccinated” ? and to those you label “unvaccinated”?“I have NEVER defined “vaccinated” as having “at least ONE vaccine”
except when you wanted to dismiss the Philippine study which compared vaccinated to unvaccinated“Ubiquiton, WHY does the CDC refuse to do a Vaxxed vs Unvaxxed study?”
Are you for real? I answered this so many times including in the very last post.
The very fact that you keep asking the same childish question that has been answered over and over only proves, my answer correct. Namely that you dont have any interest in the truth.“Rich, White and Refusing Vaccinations by New York Times – a Pro Vax Major Newspaper”
Lol, let another study you didnt read. White and higher income where significantly associated with non-vaccinating. higher education was not
“Folks, if the the Richest and Most Educated People are refusing Vaccines – Shouldn’t You???”
Hold up, so if he most educated DO vaccinate or Tell you to vaccinate you would?Doomsday
I love how you shift in your definition of “vaxxed”
first you discard a study because the unvaccinated group received SOME vaccines (although this is a definition that has zero basis in science as has been pointed out to you several times) ) thus any vaccines makes a group “vaccinated” Yo u say “Vaccinated is defined as having “at least ONE vaccine”.”Two lines later you discard another study for the opposite reason “Vaccinated children were NOT vaccinated per CDC schedule – FAR fewer vaccines.”
which is it? does receiving fewer than recommended vaccines make someone “vaccinated” or “unvaccinated” you cant have it both ways .“There were other explanations why Vaccinated kids scored higher in school (NOT the vaccines)!
The Vaccinated children had:
1) had mothers with more education,”Exactly! this too has been pointed out to you dozens of times. you claim to want a vaxxed vs unvaxxed study. by definition (almost) anyone who doesn’t vaccinate their children is either unintelligent, uneducated or just doesnt care about their children . There will always be these confounding factors
doomsday
“All Anti-Vaxxers want is the Right to Decide whether or not they or there children should be Vaccinated.”Yet another a lie.
That is not all you want. you also want to force those of sound mind to have your kid’s near ours.
You’ve been asked several times why you think you have this right,, this is but one of dozens of questions you haven’t answered.
Please Please Please don’t reply with vaxxed children spreading disease, since aside from this being true it isnt relevent. Lets say, I want my kids to get measles from vaccinated children and not to be friends with children of kooky pro-disease parents. Again, we arent discussing the soundness of this decision, It might be craz and not grounded in fact. But r if that is what the parent body wants, why dont we have that right?If a parent body doesn’t want kids who own televisions or whose names’ start with a vowel, or who arent vaccinated why dont the parents have that right?
Thanksdoomsday
“This is another Holocaust,…”Yet another topic you clearly know nothing about
Rebyid
I think Joseph was just identifying himself as a a Jaundiced Chinese-American“Who is Lying? Doomsday or ProVaxxers?”
doomsday
“Folks, first the ProVaxxers Lied that there are NO studies showing a link between Vaccines and Autism – except for Wakefield. ”
I never said that. (at least I didint mean that, sorry if I wasn’t clear) What I meant was that there is no study linking vaccines, and autism, period. Wakefiel’ds was retracted and no longer counts as a study than can be used to link things.
“Here are the FIRST 10 Studies listed on the site: 157 Studies linking Vaccines to Autism:”
Yep you posted these already y 70% arent about the subject at hand, and the others are weak at best.
1. again this was a preliminary study. The final results WERE published see reference earlier
I proved that ProVaxxers LIED with a google search including a site that listed:
“157 Studies linking Vaccines to Autism”2. “Ubiquiton, WHY Does CDC refuse to do a LARGE Vaxxed vs UnVaxxed Study when there IS a Vaxxed vs UnVaxxed Study that shows a Link between Vaccines and Autism???
NO PROVAXXER CAN ANSWER this question!”I literally answered this question several times.
I’m starting t o think you dont eve rend these short responses much liek you clearly didn’t read the studies (or even the TITLES of the studies you cite)“The study has validity but a LARGER Study would have GREATER Validity!”
You left off half of my critique of said study3. Sorry it was published I was wrong on that point.
nonetheless as I pointed out there is a big flaw in that study4 -7
“A Study showing MERCURY causes Autism”
But that isnt the subject at hand8
“caused Autism in Rats.” Are you being serious? Autistic rats? (though to be fair I did come across some interesting autistic rat models w/ autistic type features)” Is Ubiquiton claiming that all the Medicine Safety Studies done by Pharmaceutical Companies using Rats are INVALID???”
No, are you claiming that If I did a study that showed that removing a rat’s larynx did not change its ability to speak (not squeak or squeal) you would accept that “hey I guess larynx doesnt play a role in human speach, go ahead and remove them willy nilly” ?9. “WRONG! It was a study showing Vaccines cause diagnosis of “Emotional Disturbance” in Boys”
you must be talking about a different study.
Assuming yuo mean Gender-selective toxicity of thimerosal.: Exp Toxicol Pathol. 2009 Mar;61(2):133-6. doi: 10.1016/j.etp.2008.07.002. Epub 2008 Sep 3.
It is in fact about mice (This one is neither about Autism nor vaccines its about thimerosal and toxicity rates in male mice compared to females) )10. Again, neither about vaccines nor autism.
“So who is lying? I showed you that 9 out of 10 of the first 10 studies from site “157 Studies showing Link between Vaccines and Autism” are showing that Vaccines or Mercury are associated with Autism.”
Ah but thats not what you claimed earlier .Earlier you said vaccines and autism.
To date you have not showed a single study establishing such a linkI’m happy to switch to the admittedly tangentially related, mercury and autism . But one thing at a time.
Are you out of studies trying to link Autism to vaccines?
doomsday
“Folks, Proof that Ubiquiton and Yserbius are Liars. Google “studies linking vaccines autism” and find these sites:”Sigh, I’m busted.
Now all you need to do is provide study (again, don’t tell me to google I’m terrible at googling )
I see further down you provide a list.
thank youWell this my or may not surprise you but the “studies” dont say what you hope they do
1. This was a preliminary unpublished abstract. which ultimately led to “Safety of thimerosal-containing vaccines: a two-phased study of computerized health maintenance organization databases.” (one of hundreds of studies showing NO LINK between vaccines (though this was specifically on thimersol) and autism)
2. This was a cross-sectional pilot study with a lot of room for confounding variables and recall bias. As the authors conclude “Further research involving larger, independent samples and stronger research designs is needed to verify and understand these unexpected findings in order to optimize the impact of vaccines on children’s health.”
3. another unpublished study, this was a poster where they looked at 31 children who with Autism who received Hep B vaccine.
another bid flaw with this “study” is that comparing kids born in the 80’s (pre hep B vaccine) to kids born in the 90’s doesnt prove much about autism. I dont deny that autism rates have gone up. The question is why.
you could do the same study on whether the kid grew up in a home with a PC. Obviously as home PC use increased autism rates increased, but that doesnt mean one caused the other.
4. This isnt about vaccines
5. ditto
6. ditto
7. ditto
8. This isnt about autism (rats can be autistic? who knew?
9. ditto (Though mice , not rats)
10. dittoThus as you can see (at least so far) thre are in fact NO studies linking vaccines and autism.
Of the 10 you mentioned 7 (or 70%) werent even about the subject at hand. The other 3 were preliminary or suffered from serious flaws, or bothI for the life of me don’t understand people who expected something different..
I get this argument: “He is so much better than a Hillary Clinton or Obama ” (though I disagree, but that isnt my point)
What I dont get is people who are now surprised by his lack of “civility, consensus building, & predictable governance”
It’s not like he was an unknown candidate. He has spent the last decades in the public limelight . how on Earth did you expect anything different?Doomsday
Nobody is changing any questions.
“Are there research studies showing a link between Vaccines and Autism – aside from Wakefield?”Asked and answered.
I’ll answer again no there aren’t.Your turn.
You keep saying ” I have shown there are 100+ Studies Linking Vaccines to Autism ”
Can you pretty ease with a cherry on top provide even ONE?“Are you a PHd Scientist? ”
No way, are you kidding! All scientists are int pocket of big pharma. I won my degree in a cereal box. Granted I’m in the pocket of Big Cereal, so you probably shouldn’t trust my research on fruity pebbles curing measles and scrambled eggs causing autism. but my medicine science is super trustworthy“Is your study published?”
Yes, I just published it. It is in the “British Organization of Gastroenterology Umazing Science” (BOGUS for short)
(sadly links can’t be provided, its on a google drive
)
“I am saying there are 100+ Research studies by real SCIENTISTS and MEDICAL DOCTORS – some of which have been PUBLISHED in peer reviewed journals – showing a Link between Vaccines and Autism.”Name ONE.
“even after I show you again and again and again
that there are 100+ Research Studies showing a Link between Vaccines and Autism.”Since you’ve shown so many times, would you be so kind as to showing once more . Name ONE STUDY please.
(oops, my heads/tails study proved vaccines DON’T cause autism)
Doomsday
“Again, not talking about the VALIDITY of the studies. Just that they exist.
I’m saying apples and you’re saying oranges.”I dont know what that means.
I flipped a coin and said “heads- vaccines cause autism, tails- they don’t ”
It landed on tails.There, now we have a study proving vaccines cause autism.
Do you agree with the above statement? I’m not saying its a valid study, just that it existsNote: I made sure to make this a “Only a Vaxxed vs UnVaxxed Study” which I know is important to you .
“Walkefield’s was a “Case Report””
No it is a case sereis.” and yet CDC and Pro-Vaxxers acknowledge tha as an “vaccine-autism linked study””
Becasue at the time there were no better studies. A Case series certainly raises concerns, but once there is better data available then a case series is no longer as meaningful.for example if I describe an inserting case series of 13 patients who ate an apple a day and never went to a doctor. Certainly a interesting case series . Then we look back at 95,000 patient’s charts and we see that there is no difference between those who went ate apples and those who didn’t. It is no longer meaningful if you say look here is another guy who ate an apple a day and never got sick, (How do you not know this,? I thought you said you understood medical research, this is a very basic point.)
“but they INSIST there are NO other research papers linking vaccines to autism when there ARE!”
for example….
“But You CANNOT Say that there aren’t any Studies showing a Link between Vaccines and Autism.”
Yes I can.
Now granted It depends how you define study,you’ve had some funny definitions over the course of the past 21 pages and some made up Scientific “rules” (eg “Only a Vaxxed vs UnVaxxed Study has SCIENTIFIC Validity.”)There without question arent “100’s” of studies . when people say there are “studies” on vaccines and autism, the sits often include studies that aren’t about vaccines, autism or both. They often include “studies” that appeared in pay-to-play journals that aren’t grounded in reality and that have no oversight.
Finally they often include Case reports which arguably isn’t a study, and certainly can’t be used to PROVE anything.I’d be happy to [play this game with you post a “study” and I’ll tell you why it doesn’t who what you think it shows, and why it lacks validity.
Don’t tell me to google “157 studies” or just copy and paste a list of references
Lets do this one a at time. Post ONE study and I will explain to you what is wrong with using said study as a reference.doomsday
“Folks, THERE ARE 157 Research Studies Linking Vaccines to Autism. ”You keep saying that, that doesn’t make it true
I’m not sure what list you are referring too. most such lists include studies that arent about vaccines, arent about autism or both .I think you are confusing with DOES NOT cause autism. To that end there are well over 157 studies.
I know I know the studies arent good because bot h groups ate apples or had other vaccines or something, so somehow that doesn’t show that MMR isnt linked to autism
spare me.
But please stop lyingDY
she isn’t feeling so well, she came down with the measlesdooms
“Study! I can’t help it if you don’t understand Science!”I don’t need your help. Part of my job includes reading studies and even performing them. I am quite well trained thank you very mush.
However I am not as well versed in fake -science. you are making up assertions that have zero validity.
“YOU should learn how science works. If you want to see if MMR causes autism you would need to test
children who received ONLY the MMR vs children 100% unvaccinated.”
This is bogus.
If I want to test if an apple a day keeps the doctor away, I compare an apple eating group to say, an orange eating group. and see if there is a difference in their doctor visits.
It doesn’t matter if both groups eat bananas. that isnt what is being looked at.you throw around terms that you clearly don’t understand like “Healthy-user bias”
thsi isnt relevant in a retrospective study“”And Yet ANTI-VAXXERS are the ones demanding the Study. Because WE KNOW that UNVAXXED Kids have a MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH LOWER Rate of Autism then Vaxxers. “”
no that isnt why. It is because you are kicking the can down the road. Once that study is done you will come up with a new complaint as you have EVERY TIME a study has been presented to you. It is the literal definition of insanity (the one attributed to Einstein) to think that THIS time you will not make up some new reason not to accept the study
“If you are opposed to this study,”
I’m not opposed to any study. I am just certain it will be a pure waste of money and time. I have been down this road for years. Nothing will satisfy you. Look at the Jama study. You are literally making up “science” rules to run from life saving vaccines
“ProVaxxers: I have repeatedly asked this question but you cannot answer it:
WHY Won’t CDC do a Vaxxed vs UnVaxxed Study? (Retrospective – no “ethical” issues)”Please please please stop lying.
Chazal say that people don’t lie if they will get caught. The number of times youve lied in this thread is making me doubt chazal ch”vThis question has been answered numerous times.
for example:
There have been vaccinated vs unvaccinated studies – not good enough yo u want them not to have had any vaccines, yet strangely you don’t concede that MMR doesnt increase risk of autism .
If that study would be done it wouldn’t be good enough for some other illogical reason
Aside from the fact that the control group would be pretty samll, how many parent are there who don’t care about their children at all? Ok a few skip a vaccine here or there but to deny all vaccines? ITs hard to belive there are that many pro-diseasers around. furthermore they would be self selecting, so even if it turns out that the pro-disease group has higher rate of autism, you could logically argue that because their parents are so brain damaged not to care about their kids at all that they were predisposed to other neurological conditions . This is a more logical arguemtn than your argument that MMR is somehow different than other vaccines and yet the same when it comesDoomsday
“The CDC is a government agency…”i’m still not sure what you mean, but you ignored my question (as usual)
“Congress Refuses to pass a Bill to FORCE CDC to Conduct a Vaxxed vs UnVaxxed Study! That means congress KNOWS vaccines ARE causing Injury but is helping COVER IT UP!”
that logic is sketchy at best. If congress refuses to FORCE CDC to conduct a study as to whether JFK was abducted by a UFO, does that mean they KNOW that pickles are delicious?
More questions
Can you think of any case where congress forced the CDC to do a study?
Can you think of any of the literally thousands of study’s out there that made any pro-disease individual go “hmmmm… maybe I am mistaken” why do you think one more study would be different?Doomsday
“There has NEVER been a study that had a result that was BAD for the Company/Government who PAID for the Study!”
I’m not sure what yo umean by “bad for the government”
Isnt ever yvaccine study that shows the safety and efficacy of vaccines bad for the government since they pay for vaccines w/ medicare medicaid etc?
And if not, then isnt Wakefield’s “study” that started this nonsense bad for the government that provided funding
(through the royal London NHS trust)“It doesn’t mean that MMR doesn’t contribute but it’s hard to tell when there are so many other vaccines.”
What would the power have to be to find such a difference?I don’t know why they are silent.
I do have a guess though. The solution to the problem is quite obvious .As has been highlighted in several publications, our test scores are higher than public school’s. However as we all know this is only a partial truth. There are many yeshivos that fail (or would fail if they offered said tests) with flying colors. It is largely because of those institutions that we are in this mess at all.
It is hard to argue, that the goverment has a right to mandate nitty gritty education details when we are doing as well as the public school system
However it is also hard to argue that all yeshivos fall into that category. and it is hard to argue that the State has no vested interest in insuring that all chidren (especialy if govt funds are involved) recieve some basioc education.So were does that leave us?
Should we pressure all yeshivos to offer greater secular education?
Should we keep waving the high scoring ones in the air and hope the state doesn’t notice our bait and switch?
Or should we bury our heads in the sand and pretend that the above isn’t true?The latter is the easiest
jay23
“Why is this so complicated, ….Same here MMr does not cause autism , yes maybe other ones do but mmr not”I made that very same point to Doomsday several pages ago.
Like most points made, s/he chose to ignore it , and/or repeat the same thing over and over
It is complicated because doomsday (like all pro-diseasers) has no interest in actually understanding the subject at hand.“Ignored…”
You HAVE GOT to be kidding!
This thread is 18 pages long now.
We aren’t ignoring any of those things.
It is terrible what you are doing to your children, that’s why we are here, we are NOT ignoring them.
You (not individually I mean “you” as in the collective anti-vax group) are ignoring truth, ignoring (many) questions posed, ignoring answers
and as a result neglecting your children.
Don’t blame that on us.Curiosity
I think youre reading a different thread“Your argument that they *claim* to support our causes in their written platform”
Not once did I argue that (in this thread)
LEt’s review
OP – Everything the democrats support is against the Torah
Me- that’s silly here are a bunch of things they support that arent agaisnt the Torah
now, you are claiming that I was being “hyperliteral ” since obviously the op couldn’t possibly mean that.
Whcih of course I agree with no body could believe something so silly.On this though I was wrong, He then doubled down and instead of saying “I’ didn’t mean it literally” started listing random sentences like “If they wanted affordable housing, they wouldn’t punish us with high property taxes”
Then you joined in, and seem confused too. as to whether you think the OP was kidding (as I did originally) or if the OP was right and that “Everything the that the OP wrote indicated that he/she was specifically addressing the anti-Torah values of the Dem’s ”
Only a true Hannity follower could possibly be this confused.
simple question the OP said
“Every issue on the [ Democrat] party platform, is against Torah Jewry.” – True or false ?Don’t change it to “some issues that some Democrats believe in are against Torah Jewry” that is of course true and is not what we are discussing
once again:
“Every issue on the [ Democrat] party platform, is against Torah Jewry.” – True or false ?As an aside I’m a bit confused by this thread.
does anybody think the op’s initial comment was a real one? or added anything meaningful.
Even if you think the Republican’s have better policies (not the subject of this thread) or that overall the GOP is closer to Torah (closer to the subject, but not what hte OP wrote)Is’nt it obvious that this whole thread started out silly.
And that my response was a silly and (in my opinion) funny way to point out how silly this is?does anybody think I meant “I knew the torah hated supporting working families and protecting workers rights,” or that I thought the op felt that revitalizing the post office was “against Torah jewry” ?
why would anybody take this thread seriously?
curiosity
Love your comment
You must be a supporter of alternative facts Sure. IF PArty platform doesnt mean Party platform, Torah doesn’t mean Torah. Then it’s completely true“f we take it to mean that “every issue I think they believe is against what Sean Hannity tells me to think”
Then yes the statement is true.
sincerest apologies,“No offense.”
Absolutely none taken. when you say “party platform” you should mean party platform. If you want to reply ok. Ubiquitin, you are technically 100% correct, but that isn’t what the op meant, stop being so literal.
Sure. that could be true
But that isnt what the op replied , he doubled down. Avi K got lost in some rambling about side issues. This kind of knee jerk poorly thought out positions amuses me. so don’t worry I am not offended and thoroughly enjoy this strange threadAvi,
The GOP platform doesn’t mention how delicious pizza is either!
I’m not sure how that is relevant but I guess we are sharing random facts nowNCB
“Not really. The original comment I made was referring…”
So one of several reasons wasnt rational not all of them.
You still seem to be unsure about, the copay issue “I don’t see why…”You are probably right. There certainly is some way to set up a fund to reimburse deductibles without technically being insurance fraud. A simpler way is to send a bill but not collect (though i’m not sure if the bill is paid if they can refuse payment). This is an issue, that must be considered.
There are other issues as well. IF you think this is a bigger issue, or even the only one fine. But to say there is no room for any discussion and no “rational reason” to oppose it is a bit short sighted.Avi
“anybody who really believes in the so-called two-state solution (there are already three states: Israel, Jordan and Gaza) is living in a fool’s ”
Agreed 100%. Though that isn’t what this topic is about. and I should note that the Republicans and Netanyahu for that matter all profess to believe it too.
1.
Ah yes who can forget the 2 Democrats Bush who forced Israel not to retaliate when scuds where rained down and pushed Israel to give up Gaza respectivelyanon,
while not all of your examples are accurate (some are Not in the democratic platform and some are not always assur) I did not mean to imply that ALL the Democrat’s potions align with the Torah.I’m sorry if you misunderstood.
eisenshia
” you’re the laugh. ”
Thank you! I’m glad to bring simcha to yidden“They openly admit their agenda is to do investigations on Trump until they believe they find something on him to try to impeach. ”
I’m confused a line earlier you said ” and as far as their policies to benefit the American people…they have none.” which is it?Though again, worth noting Trump is not mentioned even once in the party platform, and again this thread isn’t about how great for america the Democrats would be.
1.
Lol!
I wasn’t going to post their whole platform. you said “Every issue on the party platform, is against Torah Jewry.”As for their position on Israel, I assumed you where from neturie karta and felt that the Torah opposed Israel thus in that view the DNC pro- Israel position l was “against Torah Jewry”
Apolagies if I misinterpreted your position I was trying to understand as many of their postions as being “Against Torah Jewry” to try to limit how wrong you are.Here is their position
“A strong and secure Israel is vital to the United States because we share overarching strategic interests and the common values of democracy, equality, tolerance, and pluralism. That is why we will always support Israel’s right to defend itself, including by retaining its qualitative military edge, and oppose any effort to delegitimize Israel, including at the United Nations or through the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement.We will continue to work toward a two-state solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict negotiated directly by the parties that guarantees Israel’s future as a secure and democratic Jewish state with recognized borders and provides the Palestinians with independence, sovereignty, and dignity. While Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations, it should remain the capital of Israel, an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths. Israelis deserve security, recognition, and a normal life free from terror and incitement. Palestinians should be free to govern themselves in their own viable state, in peace and dignity.”
NC
“The only way to avoid that would be if hatzalah could pay it without the patient ever even seeing it. I’m not sure that’s possible.”I second DY’s question “NCB, are you now seeing things differently than when you said you haven’t seen a rational reason not to bill insurance?”
And I should note I raised this concern in the very first post on this thread (after the OP)
The point of a deductible/copay is PRECISELY to deter patients from going to the doctor. A person won’t go to his/her doctor for sniffles if he knows it will cost him $20. OF course if its been going long enough, at some point it is worth the $20 and he’ll go. (Anecdotally, I have seen those whith medicare which often doesnt have a copay do have a lower threshold to seek medical care, I am not aware of any hard data on this, and this may not be a bad thing per se) .
I don’t know about ambulance billing, but I do know about office billing and Joseph is exactly right “Insurance contracts and federal Medicare regulations prohibit a provider from forgiving (or paying themselves for the patient) the copay or deductible.””
That isn’t to say copays arent waived for family/friends/professional courtesy/ financial need/ etc but these cases are TECHNICALLY insurance fraud (I’m anonymous here, right?) and obviously if done often enough and publicly at some point it would invite an audit.Avi
“I looked.”
Mazel;l tov!“More of the same economic illiteracy. More regs and higher taxes to strangle business. ”
I’m not so sure you read the op. We arent disucssing if these ar e GOOd policies.” Just to give one example,…”
To give you a counter example, raising the minimum wage does not create unemployment (you can google this statement and get several articles) by adding money to workers’ pocketbooks and allows them to buy more goods and services, creating higher demand, which in turn requires hiring more workers.Again, though this isn’t the topic of this thread. you are of course free to start a thread on why the GOP’s platform is better , or why the DNC’s doesnt make sense.
(Though while we are off topic, though of another example of the torah’s hatred of capitalism (if you recall we discussed this a few years back and I gave you a handful of examples showing how the Torah throughouly opposed pure capitalism fel free to dig it up) namely the issur of ani hamehapech becharara, yes it doesnt ALWAYS apply, )
“what about forcing people to change their religious beliefs (in particular to support toeva “weddings”), shutting up anybody who offends them (= anybody tro their right), appeasing Iran and other terrorists (in particular the Fakestinians) and bashing Israel?”
ok, i’ll bite what about it? sounds terrible!
“Regarding your hilarious list:”
It’s not mine its the DNC’s“1-2. How, pray tello? By fiat?”
Read the platform, it is freely available on line“3. What are “fundamental rights”? Not being fired no matter what they do?”
Read the platform, it is freely available on line“4. What does that mean? With whose money?”
Read the platform, it is freely available on line“5-6. See #1-2”
See the response to 1-2“7. It’s already headed towards bankruptcy. They want to speed up the process?”
no“8. What is dignified? I am retired and I think that my dignity requires me to live in a mansion with servants and have a private jet. LOL”
Read the platform, it is freely available on line.“9. The best thing to do is to let it die with dignity so that private industry can take over.”
That very well may be, and note this isn’t a thread over whether the Democrats have the right or even good ideasIt’s just about educating the masses that “Revitalizing Our Nation’s Postal Service” is against the Torah.
(you are taking this too seriously obviously the OP was kidding and my response was to share the hilarity
Love it!
Purim comes early this year!Here is the first chunk of the Deomcrat’s party platform (from 2016):
” RAISE INCOMES AND RESTORE ECONOMIC SECURITY FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS
Raising Workers’ Wages
Protecting Workers’ Fundamental Rights
Supporting Working Families
Helping More Workers Share in Near-Record Corporate Profits
Expanding Access to Affordable Housing and Homeownership
Protecting and Expanding Social Security
Ensuring a Secure and Dignified Retirement
Revitalizing Our Nation’s Postal Service”I knew the torah hated supporting working families and protecting workers rights,
but who knew the Torah opposed revitalizing the post office?Thank you for the laugh.
“Folks, do you believe that? Ever heard of a doctor prescribing 7-8 Medications to be taken AT ONE TIME???”
I’m not sure if you are being serious but litterally daily.
Here is a med list of patient I saw these are his AM meds (note: he is part of an “older generation” who was not zoche have received them all as a child:
1) Aspirin
2) HCTZ
3) Nifedipine
4) Metformin
5) Januvia
6) Olmesartan
7) Metoprolol
8) Xarelto“Has anyone TESTED the CDC Schedule (not individual vaccines) to see if that statement is True?”
Of course! otherwise how would we know?
for example see : Glanz JM, Newcomer SR, Daley MF, et al. Association Between Estimated Cumulative Vaccine Antigen Exposure Through the First 23 Months of Life and Non–Vaccine-Targeted Infections From 24 Through 47 Months of Age. JAMA. 2018;319(9):906–913. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.0708
“Folks, Still Trust the CDC? Still Trust that Vaccines are safe???”
More than ever! I knew they had studies, but didn’t realize HOW MANYAlso, when you get a chance if you could clarify your view on whether more vaccines help those who have already been vaccinated (as you indicated earlier)
and if you could please answer MAchla’s questionThanks
doomsday
“You don’t make sense! There are many medicines that were tested for safety. But if you take 7-8 medicines
AT SAME TIME it can be Deadly. So too, can taking 7-8 Vaccines AT SAME TIME be far more dangerous then”Sorry, but you don’t make sense.
taking multiple medications doesnt magically make then deadly. True, there are specific combinations where one medication inhibits the breakdown (or accelerates) of another . Thus in those specific cases, for reasns that are clear taking them together can have detrimental effects.Also earlier, you implied that while healthiest where those who are 100% unvaccinated, those who were vaccinated would benefit from the flu vaccine. IS this in fact your view.
Also Machla is eagerly awaiting a response to her question
“Now if the concerns you listed are the same ones the opposing side has,”
It’s one of them
“it seems that this can be worked out so that all of these concerns are handled”
I’m not sure how, though again that is what the other side says. This is part of the argument“it would seem that you would also be in favor of billing.”
This is but one concern, though again Like I said in most of my posts in this thread I’m not opposed to billing per se, I’m just answering the op’s question as to why some are (I do see how my last comment to you doesn’t quite sound that way, but in most of my comments I was careful to phrase it that I was not saying I was completely opposed now)Doomsday
“Who are you going to believe Studies (that were proven Fraudulent) or your lying eyes? ”
Why, studies of course!
See I knew you’d come around. My eyes tell me that the world is flat. I can see it for myself! yet wiht ha little research I know that my eyes are deceiving me, they are in fact lying. What we see isnt always so.Wait, you believe the world is flat, don’t you?
2scents
“I am under the assumption that these monies will cover their operating budget ”
Great! then I don’t see a problem. I just don’t want to risk changing an organization by hanging on an assumption
NC
“This is money they need for operations, not profit”
Is it though?
“Before you try to somehow spin…”
there is no need to spin and no need to pt words in my mouth. I am here and if clarification is needed I’m happy once again to elaborate“” There’s no way that quote is not assuming they are after profit. ”
I am not assuming that. I think they see it as easy money that is just sitting there, and what is the harm in taking it. I (and some in Hatzalah brass) feel that there is a downside, not that their goal now is to make a profit, but that once they do there will be no turning back. Unless of course this replaces donors.
“They are remaining non-profit. End of story.”
Depending what you mean by “non-profit” I’m not sure why you are so sure. wil lthere not be a salary for the big-wigs? how do you know? How could you be so sure? to close with such a finality “End of Story”?
“that’s just you being wrong.”
Again, I am 100% ok with being wrong about this. Many, including many Hatzolah brass, think I am wrong ,or that the benefit outweighs the negative, and again I am not so sure it doesnt either.I jut am not sure how you are so sure that this definitely won’t change
“maybe you should publicly advocate that people donate less to Hatzolah. Wouldn’t want them to become corrupt, right?”I don’t follow, if Hatzaola was raising more money than they needed, of course people should donate less (and give to a needy organization) is that a controversial opinion?
“Vaccination weakens the immune system, making one more likely to get the Flu, and more likely to die from the Flu.”
Just so I understand this so in people who have already revived some vaccines, who now have a weakened immune system, vaccines ARE helpful?
doomsday
Machla here again
Hi thanks for your your “response”I know all that, but you havent answered my question
“1. Because Recently Vaccinated Children can Spread disease (including measles) so what right do you have to bar vaccine-free kids, when you allow Recently Vaccinated Children to attend school?”Yes of course they can. I know we dont have evidence for this but it feels true I can totally smell the measles emanating off freshly vaccinated children . But this doesn’t answer my question. Granted the pro-vaxxers are fools for not realizing that their kids are so much of a bigger risk, but what right do we have to force them?
for example say some community feels that green hats have a corrupting influence, now we love green hats and we knwo that they are silly to ban us for the color of outr hats. but if they want to keep green hats out, why isnt that there right? evidence or no evidence?“2. Since Vaccines are 97% effective, 3% of the vaccinated children are unknowingly “vaccine-free”. So since
3% of kids are anyway “vaccine-free” what right do you have to bar other “vaccine-free” kids from school?”not me, I’m on your side I, like you am pro-disease . I hope we get all their kids sick the population can use a good thinning .
Though this point makes less sense than your first, at leadt those kids tried (in their view) to keep their kids safe. And again why do they need a “right” to bar us. We arent a protected minority (though we should apply for said protection using american’s with disabilities act given how brain damaged we are) say they just plain don’t like us, if my neighbor doesnt like me, I cant force him to invite me into his home. why should we force them to invite us into their schools?“3. …
Same as #2thanks for taking the time, keep up the good fight.
looking forward to actual answers, if possibleMachla
dbrim
“Experimental research is the ONLY research approach that Demonstrates cause and effect”
So, that isn’t true.
As has been pointed out in BMJ: “As with many interventions intended to prevent ill health, the effectiveness of parachutes has not been subjected to rigorous evaluation by using randomised controlled trials. Advocates of evidence based medicine have criticised the adoption of interventions evaluated by using only observational data. We think that everyone might benefit if the most radical protagonists of evidence based medicine organised and participated in a double blind, randomised, placebo controlled, crossover trial of the parachute.”
see: Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma related to gravitational challenge: systematic review of randomised controlled trials
BMJ 2003; 327 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7429.1459 (Published 18 December 2003)
Cite this as: BMJ 2003;327:1459” and it’s not unethical”
It is.” – there are plenty of parents on the fence, some of whom might be willing to participate in a true experiment (random assignment, one group gets the vaccine, the other does not). ”
1) It would be rwrong to seprive innocent kids of helpful vaccine
2) The pools wouldnt be random since there would be the confounding factor of the smarter group reviving the vaccine, maybe being smarter prevents measles?” to argue “unethical” is itself unethical and unscientific ”
Are you really suggesting that any scientific experiment is automatic acceptable?“we can lay rest to the debate and know the truth with very little effort. Why is this not being done?”
This is the real crux of the issue, it wouldn’t lay anything to rest. Pro-diseasers would keep moving the goal post. Just look at this thread. How man studies were cited , wev’e forgotten that originally they claimed none existed. now oh ok I guess those exist but we want others…
and here is the real kicker. RCT’s do exist too! (though not as many ) Are you telling me that if I provide a Randomized double blinded study of vaccine (Say in Bangladesh) showing the safety and efficacy of said vaccine you will accept it?
Doomsday
This question has been posed to you several times, you have yet to answer.
Since you enjoy postive support I asked my anti-vax neighbor to ask her question, her words follow:
Hi dooms! Machla here
Great job standing up to these anti-disease bullies You are doing a fantastic job repeating the same hings over and over no matter how often it is debunked. keep it up. we need people like you out there defending our rights. I like driving around the neighborhood with my kids balanced on the roof of my car, would you believe that the government has been trying to stop me! Whats next banning bris milah! (as you of course know as number of kids riding in cars has increased autism has increased thereby proving that riding in a car causes autism) .At any rate though one question I’ve been getting, that I’m not quite sure how to answer is the following:
My pro-vax neighbor says he respects my right not to vaccinate, but he doesn’t want my kids in the same school as his. Now we both know that his kids are MORE likely to get measles than my unvaccinated kids, but he raises a good point if he based on his flawed studies wants to keep his kids in a vaxx only school, what right do we have to force our vaccine-free kids on theirs?Thanks, all the best!
MachlaLucy feel fre to answer as well
““Money corrupts” is not a rational reason,”
I know you are but what am I.
If you need it explained in more detail, I’d be happy too (as always) no need for blaket dismissals of other opinions. Right now Hatzolah is strictly a chesed organization. The sole reason for its existence is to help the klal (True some members join for the glitzy lights and the hock, but by and large it exists for chesed)
Once they start making money the motivation will change (not may, it will) this is guaranteed. Whether this will negatively affect patient care, I concede that it may not (as I said earlier) but once it starts making money there will be pressure to cut corners and make more money. Thus, if it functioning well now (whcih it is as it has over the past decade) why turn it into a money making machine.