this thread made my head hurt:

[WindRavenX]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2509352#2509497
x( x( x(

[bliss_eternal]

1. LOL!

It's certainly long, isn't it? Given I'm trying to get rid of a headache, I'll just ask you what about it made your head hurt? (as opposed to making my head hurt more trying to figure it out :)LOL!

[TomInTib]

2. Goodness

I think that there were some people on that thread that worked harder on that than I do in a week.

[bliss_eternal]

3. LOL!

Maybe I should read it, I'm intrigued.

[TomInTib]

4. If your head is hurting now, don't do it...

Keep your head.

[tandot]

5. Where to start???? Mercury or vaccines that prevent cervical cancer

might be really bad...and there was another thread posted inside that thread about ???what???

Oh boy...I sure wish more DUers would do their research...or...some freepers would just stop posting their incoherent and unscientific stuff.

I might have had two shots of tequilas, but I really have a hard time understanding why people can't do basic research? WTF???

Try Google scholar for a change, if you don't have access to an University library.

[Occulus]

13. I took me 0.16 seconds to get the CDC info on the vaccine.

Slightly more if you count the click and the page loading time.

I would say, Certain Parties don't want the facts.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

6. as a victim of cervical cancer, I say...

Go Beverly!!

Don't let these girls go through what I did.

[rman]

10. If it's a good medicine,

people can benefit from it without it being "required" (mandatory), can they not?

What would be good is if it were state subsidised, so that people who could not afford it otherwise can also benefit from it. Again: if it is a good medicine - and i don't have any particular reason to trust the testing overseen by a Big Pharma -staffed oversight commission.

[skids]

7. It is a very interesting issue.

On the one hand, you have the fact that if there is no requirement for some vaccines, nutjobs will not get their kids vaccinated, and in this case there would be a whole lot of said nutjobs given the nature of the product. (From the "Abstinence only" camp.)

On the other hand there is the legitimate concern for properly controlled phase-in of new products, as vaccines are not entirely without danger (allergic reactions in the short term, or unknown longterm effects) though arguably they can even now be demonstrated to be less impactful than cancer.

And finally unrelated to the issue itself of whether the legislation is appropriate at all, the legislature did a huge disservice politically by bringing this legislation up right before midterms, stoking the "hedonistic nanny-state" meme at precisely the wrong time.

[rman]

8. I think mandatory vaccination for anything other than

preventing an epedemic is overly invasive, unnecessary - except to line the pockets of big pharma.

[DemExpat]

9. I feel the same way, rman,

and I had beginning stages of cervical cancer 15 years ago.

DemEx

[Occulus]

14. HPV *IS* an epidemic.

According to Planned Parenthood,

How many people have genital HPV infections?

Genital HPV infections are very common among sexually active people. At any time about 20 million people in the U.S. have them. Between 10 and 15 million have high-risk types that are associated with cervical cancer. HPV is so common that about three out of four people have HPV at some point in their lives. But most people who have it don't know it.

[rman]

15. Is it any more of an epidemic than any other STD?

Are these anywhere near as potent as say, bird-flu is alleged to be?
Why no mandatory vaccination for those other STDs? What about HIV? No mandatory vaccination as far as i can tell. Those deceases don't spread as readily as epidemics that normally prompt mandatory vaccination.

[TheMadMonk]

11. Ever noticed that no one argued this way over mumps?

When it can make a bloke sterile, the shoe's on the other foot.

[Odin2005]

12. Anti-intellectualism isn't just a right-wing thing anymore.

Ever since the invention of nukes there has been a growing nomber of luddite left-wingers who think science in inhierently evil.

[WindRavenX]

17. yup, and it's sad

:(

[Wilber_Stool]

16. This is what happens when you politicise science.

No, everything. You lose trust and are unable to make informed decisions.
The way the FDA and the CDC are run these days, doubting them would be a valid argument.