r/DebateVaccines

I keep seeing people talk about how they are anti vax because they did their research but then all they talk about is how they read about a few adverse effects from a case study or someone’s own experience and the contents of vaccines but to understand these things you have to understand atleast the basics of immunology.

First of all the central concept of vaccines is to expose the immune system to an antigen which in whatever form will be the main contents of a vaccine. Everything else is just there to help deliver, preserve or enhance the vaccine. To be able to understand this you should atleast understand antigens, antibodies and the secondary immune response.

Then another huge part of vaccines is understanding probability. Probability applies to both to the adverse effects and chances of catching the disease if a person remains unvaccinated. Just because someone doesn’t get vaccinated it doesn’t mean they will catch the disease 100% and so they may remain healthy but it’s not proof that vaccines aren’t essential for preventing disease. Also understand herd immunity because if enough people get vaccinated then unvaccinated people are less likely to get the disease which is especially important for individuals who are more vulnerable such as newborns or individuals receiving chemotherapy. Then just because someone has a seizure 1 hour after getting a vaccine it doesn’t mean that the vaccine is why they had a seizure. As it’s so rare it is well possible this is entirely due to chance and it may have occurred without the vaccine.

And then finally another important concept is the diseases themselves. One key example is when everyone thought giving a child Heb B vaccine is useless because Heb B is sexually transmitted and they aren’t sexually active but Heb B is transmitted through bodily fluids including at birth which is why the Heb B vaccine at birth can be vital for protecting the newborn.

Either way this isn’t an exclusive list and I know I rambled a bit but I hope you understand what I am saying.

Hi everyone. Im a new mom trying to understand this topic better, and I’d really appreciate respectful answers from both sides.

Before having my baby, I always trusted vaccines without questioning them. Since becoming a mom, I’ve come across a lot of information online claiming that vaccines can be dangerous. The problem is that I don’t have a scientific background, so when I read pro-vaccine arguments and anti-vaccine arguments, both can sound convincing to me.

One thing I don’t understand is why the **MMR vaccine** is so often blamed for causing autism, while babies receive several vaccines much earlier (at 2 and 4 months) that some people also say contain aluminum.

If the concern is vaccines in general, why is MMR discussed so much more than the earlier ones? Is it because of the timing (around the age when autism symptoms often become noticeable), because of specific ingredients, or for some other reason?

Im genuinely trying to understand the reasoning behind this claim, not start an argument. Thanks in advance for explaining.

I think at this point it’s clear. Fauci kept defending and pushing the covid “vaccines” on people while thousands of cases of childhood cancer and autism just popped up out of nothing.

But nothing to see here. When in 2022 the first studies showed the link between the covid jab and cancer, Fauci brushed it off as “fake”. In an interview he said “I only trust CDC based science”. It makes sense, since CDC are the ones faking the studies he profits of. A former CDC official came out later and said he specifically told then to “oversaturate the journals”

After voices indicating a link to cancer got louder he wrote an email to CDC telling them to “ramp up the studies” to suffocate the cancer signal in “Vaccines are safe” studies.

And it worked. Faucis net worth skyrocketed and he later comitted to further deals with pharma which made him even more millions of $$.

Given all that, would you still think the “vaccines” are safe?

In every field they have looked at, people suffer from Dunning Kruger. Vaccines is no different here.

DK has shown over and over that the people with the least knowledge, education, or skills are the ones who wildly overestimate their own knowledge. Probably because they know so litttle they aren’t even aware of their ignorance.

Driving shows this easily. 80% of people think they are in the top half of drivers. You don’t need a study to realize 30% of bad drivers are wrong. That’s not theory or anything else. That is third grade arithmetic.

The most vocal people here who argue against vaccines in almost every case are completely ignorant. Not just of science, but also the scientific process.

Idiots of the world unite!

The Lancet published a review of mRNA vaccines that found them safe and effective: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(26)00512-X/abstract

THE BJP GOVERNMENT IS experimenting with the lives of its citizens and with the vehicles of citizens.

Here is the break-up:

COVID VACCINE ILL EFFECTS:

1. Rare, Serious Adverse Events:

Rigorous global surveillance has identified a few very rare but serious complications associated with specific types of COVID-19 vaccines.

Heart Inflammation (Myocarditis and Pericarditis):

What it is: Myocarditis is inflammation of the heart muscle; pericarditis is inflammation of the outer lining of the heart.

Associated Vaccines: Mainly mRNA vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna) and, to a lesser extent, protein subunit vaccines (Novavax).

Risk Profile: It is extremely rare, occurring at a rate of roughly 12 to 36 cases per million second doses. The risk is highest in adolescent and young adult males (ages 12–39) within the first week after the second dose.

Outcomes: The vast majority of these cases are mild, respond well to standard medical treatment or rest, and resolve quickly.

2. Blood Clotting Issues (TTS):

What it is: Thrombosis with Thrombocytopenia Syndrome (TTS) involves serious and rare blood clots combined with low blood platelet counts.

Associated Vaccines: Viral vector vaccines (such as the AstraZeneca/Covishield and Johnson & Johnson vaccines).

Status: Due to this rare risk, medical regulatory bodies worldwide shifted their preferences toward updated mRNA or protein subunit vaccines.

3. Neurological & Immune Conditions:

Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS): A rare neurological disorder where the body's immune system damages nerve cells. It was observed as a rare event primarily linked to viral vector vaccines (roughly 38 cases per million doses).

Anaphylaxis: Severe, immediate allergic reactions can happen with any vaccine or medication. It occurs in about 4.7 cases per million doses of mRNA vaccines and is treated immediately on-site with epinephrine.

PETROL-ETHANOL ADULTERATION ILL EFFECTS:

1. Mechanical and Engine ill Effects:

Corrosion of Metal Components: Ethanol is highly corrosive to certain metals. In an incompatible fuel system, it attacks and oxidizes aluminum, brass, copper, and steel parts. This leads to internal rusting and pitting in the fuel tank, fuel lines, injectors, and carburetors.

Degradation of Rubber and Plastics: Unlike petroleum, alcohol acts as a solvent that degrades, swells, and cracks older formulations of rubber hoses, gaskets, and plastic fuel components. This can lead to critical fuel leaks and dangerous fire hazards.

Phase Separation (The Water Trap): Ethanol is hygroscopic, meaning it actively draws moisture out of the surrounding air. When the water content in the fuel tank reaches a certain threshold (usually less than 1%), the ethanol and water bond together and separate from the petrol, sinking to the bottom of the tank. If the fuel pump draws from this bottom layer, it pumps an abrasive water-alcohol mix into the engine, causing immediate stalling or severe misfires.

Clogging from Debris: As ethanol scours the inside of old fuel tanks, it dissolves varnish deposits built up over years of petrol use. This loosened debris travels down the system, quickly clogging fuel filters and fuel injectors.

2. Vehicle Performance Impacts:

Noticeable Drop in Mileage: Ethanol contains roughly 30% to 35% less energy by volume than pure gasoline. For an un-calibrated engine, running on accidental or high-adulteration ethanol levels typically leads to a 5% to 8% drop in fuel economy, meaning you pay the same price at the pump but get fewer miles per litre.

Rough Idling and Misfires: Because ethanol alters the air-fuel ratio (making the engine run "leaner" or with more oxygen than intended), older vehicles experience sluggish acceleration, rough idling, engine hesitation, and difficulty starting—especially during cold weather.

3. Environmental & Consumer Complications:

Elevated Evaporative Emissions: While tailpipe carbon emissions generally drop with ethanol blends, low-to-mid level blends actually increase the Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) of the fuel. This means the fuel evaporates much faster from open-air tanks and vents, releasing volatile organic compounds (VOCs) like aldehydes into the atmosphere, which contribute to urban smog.

Financial and Insurance Risk: Because high-level ethanol blends behave aggressively toward older engine materials, major manufacturers and insurers frequently warn that engine damage caused by using a higher-than-recommended ethanol blend (like putting E20 in a non-compliant BS4 or early BS6 vehicle) can void warranties or lead to denied repair claims.

Hello , my child going to preschool this year and theres a requirement for vaccine , id like to know if anyone in IOWA can help me to get an exemption .

More than a year after claiming vaccines killed her infants, a mother is now charged with their murder.

Yale School of Medicine researchers have taken a significant step toward a genital herpes vaccine that in preclinical models prevented infection.

Hi all, I’m a mom with an almost-4 month old. Whether or not to vaccinate has been a heavy, complicated topic that’s caused me months of stress and worry. I’ve done so much reading and research—

I know about the Salk polio vaccine. I know about the Tennessee SIDS DPT cluster. I’ve read everything Neil Miller has ever published. I’ve read all the clinical trials. I know the RSV vaccine trials were halted because babies died.

I am familiar with Suzanne humphries, I’ve read turtles all the way down. I consider myself pretty well-read on both sides, and the only thing keeping me up at night currently is pertussis. It could be so bad for a baby, and the benefits vs. risk for the Dtap are complicated.

So I’m curious what other parents have done, and how you dealt with this issue if it ever arose, and the risk of disease vs. side effect. How did you land on your current decision/ viewpoint for your own kids?

Hey everyone.

Starting this off with the fact that I am not anti vax. My two children ( 3 and 1) are up to date on almost everything besides MMR. When I took our older one in to get hers at 1, our provider told me that if it were her child, after all the children she’d seen have regressions, that she’d wait till they were 4 or 5 and get it. She wasn’t against it, just said get it when she’s older. So I listened.
I know most of the research says it’s super safe, but as I read everything from people on both sides of the debate, it seems like even if a child did have a severe regression caused by the MMr, that they make it impossible to prove that’s what caused it.
So how do they really know there isn’t a link to autism?
My friend is super anti vaxx and when I asked why, she said her nephew received his MMr shot and screamed for 2 days straight, and then was never the same again. That just doesn’t seem coincidental.
I’m aware that autism isn’t the end of the world, but I wouldn’t forgive myself if my children were permanently changed and their lives made more difficult afterwards.
I guess I’m just looking for people to talk me off the ledge because I’d rather my children get the vaccine, but I’m a fairly open minded person and take everything into consideration on most topics.
.

Mine is probably either Charlie Sheen or Joe Rogan

I've posted a few times here and I see a pattern others have not commented on.

First, let me say this. I am certain people have died of vaccines, including Covid. How do I know? I got a vaccine in my early teens I had a terrible reaction to, and even spent a few days in the hospital. Luckily, that was it. So I am in a unique position to be aware of the risks.

But here's the rub. ALL of medicine is about weighing risks and benefits. The reason you do a treatment is not because it won't kill you, but because you are more likely to die from not accepting it.

Let's look at liver transplants. About 7-15% of those who get one die within a year because of it. Zero doubt.

But all of these people are weeks or days from dying from liver failure. The death rate would be 100% without a transplant. Instead, at least 85% of recipients go on to live a long time.

So, in medicine, we are always looking for the approach which is better than the alternative. Full stop. You could die from the treatment, but you are more likely to die not getting it.

We have the federal vaccine fund for this. Because, out of every 10 million, usually a very few will die from the vaccine. But Covid killed about 30,000 or more out of each 10 million.

In other words you - yes you - were 10,000 times more likely to die of covid than from the vaccine.

In context, you have .01% or so chance of dying in a car crash in the next year. But if the odds were 10,000 times higher, you would be over 50% likely to die of a car crash in the next year.

So put away your useless experts and studies.

The pandemicum shots bring billions of profits a year just from the shots. So it makes sense the pandemicum shots are the most popular among pharma and the entire medical industry in the west considering the world has entered the pandemicum era in 2020 which lasts forever.

https://ictv.global/taxonomy/taxondetails?taxnode_id=202301868&taxon_name=Betacoronavirus%20pandemicum

https://www.science.org/content/article/silly-and-pompous-official-new-names-viruses-rile-researchers

https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/in-2025-31-million-89-americans-actually

Why does every post regarding the shots whether or not that may be contributing to long COVID is taken down. This is complete bs and it is an infringement on free speech. All this is being gathered and presented to an attorney for a civil lawsuit very soon.

Vaccination induced T cell immune mediated dysregulation as an immune system reaction. Any vaccine can do it. The more highly reactogenic the vaccine, the more people affected. Especially in susceptible recipients.

Initial disruption occurs within one month, and the cancer risk is highest for the following 180 days, and remains elevated for the next 5 years. Most commonly triggered new cancers are lymphatic/hematological.

It's not the mRNA or dna contamination. If the same number of people worldwide had been injected with Shingrix or yellow fever vaccine, new or exacerbated or resurged cancer cases would have happened too, relative to the reactogenicity of the vaccine.

Every study forever will continue to end in 'more research is needed to determine mechanisms and chain of causation'. Which will never happen. Because they can't address how the Covid vaccines are linked to cancers without it leading to how all vaccines carry a cancer risk by the same mechanism.

From looking through the posts here I see two things many of you do.

First, you obviously Google search looking for things that support your beliefs. But in most cases it’s just some anonymous website that can hour to put up on godaddy. You find one of these, and suddenly you have proven years spent on multiple studies run by numerous experts arenwrong: because some ssd website has a headline you like.

Second, in this area I have never seen so many people truly unqualified and unable to read an actual study. I’ll even give you a pass because I’m a statistician and can read them, but they are hard to read. But what many of you do is except a paragraph from a 25 page study and - wrongly - think that explains everything.

So why?

I have been puzzling over the anti-vax mind, and have actually tried to find and learn research I could find from psychological research, plus some other observations. I also posted a provocative question here, and then tried to engage with some on their thinking if the commented. As we get down the list you get more of my observations, by the way

What I read that I doubted, but is 100% true, is that in validated psychological testing, the #1 driver is an antiauthority mindset. This matters far more than education, wealth, anything else. I was surprised how true it is. Bascially, at the core of many beliefs, there is 1) There are 10,000s of thousands of "expert" authorities, and you can't trust them.

2. What I also saw in addition here was a continued line of thought: millions of doctors and hundreds of thousands of medical researchers are in a giant conspiracy to harm us. IMHO, I saw what I think is a somewhat paranoid mindset.

3. if you ask why would millions of people all be secretly working to give children autism, or whatever, there is no answer.

4. Oddly, given the anti-authority thing, there are "heroes", who are taking some chance of some sort, that speak the truth and risk being silented or worse. So they have their own small cadre of "brave" experts they trust.

5. My own one: If you point out flat earthers behave like this, and believe in a conspiracy where millions of pilots, cartographers, and engineers who build navigation, are all in cahoots, it doesn't seem to drive a response - defensive or otherwise

6. I mean, to put it bluntly, the lack of the most basic fundamentals of science and especially biology plays a huge role.

7. I think I see that there is a general lack of sophistication in being a critical thinker all around. (and here the internet is a big culprit)

8. with the prior two, This leads them to "do their own research". As far as I can tell, they must google something like "experts who think coronavirus is a hoax". They look at these few "brave souls" who have "obliterated famous experts in front of congress" whom are their experts. But they a re gullible. For example, one of those experts, if you google, is the owner of a giant class action lawsuit firm that specializes in vaccines. His job is to convince juries, with limited science, to make conclusions about complex questions. He definitely has a dog in the hunt that is not "I'm sacrificing my career to save people from a corrupt and wicked system!"

9. There are interesting other things. One is something behavioral psychologists got in the early 80. It's bad judgment under uncertainty. For many, the thinking goes like this: If I don't get the shot and 10% of people who die from the disease - including me - that's OK. I'm not taking a shot that I know might kill me.

What do you think? To me it is still this authority thing, replacing the widespread serious experts with a small number of heros who are not out to kill you