Category: vaccination

Crack Those Pots

Free-riding anti-vaxxers.

Speaking of herds, I knew that the great reduction in diseases had a good deal to do with clinical vaccinations. I just thought: “Let someone else take on the risks of vaccinating.” It was a very selfish viewpoint because I had the best of both worlds. I knew that my daughters had a low risk of contracting vaccine-preventable diseases — precisely because vaccination is effective. I had faith in herd immunity while questioning its very existence.


Roissy and Vaccination

Dark triad indeed.

On the one hand, Roissy promotes the hedonistic, casual sex, “player” lifestyle, which includes promiscuity, sodomy, and inter-racial sex.

On the other hand, he criticizes the idea of vaccination against HPV, a sexually-transmitted virus that can cause cancer.

I can see why these “gamesters” value “dark triad” traits – they are all a bunch of sociopaths.

And, yes – who should accept blame for the fact that the vaccine is offered at disturbingly young ages, consistent with sexual activity in high school, if not in middle school?

Certainly not socially conservative national socialists.  PUA scum?  Yes. HBD perverts (hello, Derb) who, along with the gamesters, stress that the “peak attractiveness” of females is in the age 15-20 years range?  Yes. Don’t like the fact that teens (and even tweens) are “players?”  Look in the mirror.

I oppose the idea of a “big tent movement.”  When faced with evil (and stupidity, which is often the same thing), the correct action is to take a principled stand against it, not accept it.

I declare Roissy evil.  And stupid.

Yet Another Reason for Roissy to Play the Piano

“Game” retards.

These vaccines are loaded with neurotoxins

No, they’re not.

(which are why there are horrifying side effects like irreversible facial twitching), phthalates,

Who?  Where?  When?  In your imagination?

 and are ineffective. Every time there’s an outbreak….it’s the vaccinated kids who get it. This includes the Disney measles hysteria.

Idiot.  First, some percentage of the “vaccinated” didn’t have the full series.  Second, some small percentage of people do not become immune. Given that the vast majority of people are at least partially vaccinated, it’s obvious by sheer mathematics that a majority of the ill would have had at least one vaccination. What is the rate of illness between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated?  More to the point – why was measles almost eliminated in the USA, only to make a comeback when incredibly evil and ignorant anti-vaxxers started their retarded Luddite song and dance?

More to the point, vaccines are supposed to “save” kids from benign illnesses such as measles, mumps, chicken pox, and polio. These are utterly benign to any healthy individual and will pass within days as a modest fever.

A raving lunatic.  Have you ever had measles, madman?  Modest fever?  Are you out of your mind?  And while mumps is not so bad for a child, if you are worried about “ball-shrinking” you had better avoid getting mumps as an adult.  Chicken pox, dumbfuck, can lead to shingles later in life.  Real modest, that.  And oh yeah, only “weaklings” ended up paralyzed from polio. How about we inject some polio virus into your kids and find out how strong they are?

It is only the biological weaklings who can’t resist these. Yet it is the weaklings (“bubble boys”) with weak immune systems who are advised not to be vaccinated, whereas healthy kids are injected with the poisons. 

Louis Pasteur in his lab with an evil cackling laugh: “I’m gonna poison that little Kraut with this here ball-shrinking rabies vaccine!”  Yeah, big man, let’s see one of your little Christian rugrats get bitten by a rabid animal. What ya gonna do?  Stick to your guns!  Vaccines are for weaklings.  Let the kid just “sweat it out!”  Just a modest fever, after all.

 In other words, the philosophy of vaccines is to sacrifice the strong to protect the weak.

What an idiot. The strongest and best can die of these diseases as easy as any “weakling.”

Parents of healthy children need to stand up to the parents of weaklings. No, it is NOT our duty to keep your weak child healthy. That is YOUR duty. If you have a bubble boy, that’s your business, but I won’t inject my children with poisons to supposedly save him from chicken pox.

No, it is NOT our duty to protect your demented family with our herd immunity. And guess what – you and your family spread disease to me and mine, and I’ll consider it assault and battery, and attempted murder, you despicable dumbfuck.

No parent should let their child be injected with these brain-killing, ball-shrinking poisons.

What an idiot. They’re “poisons” – that’s why doctors get their own children – never mind themselves – vaccinated. It’s a mass suicidal delusion!  Let’s all just get dat dere “mild polio” and we’ll be all set!  The iron lung awaits!

 Find a good pediatrician – many Christian practices give their patients the full choice – and protect your children.

Christian – who would have guessed?  Jaysus will save you!  The dead Jew on a stick!

And a hearty “fuck you” to Jimmy Boy for bringing this crap up with his stupid post.  Hey, Wideassman, with all the Negresses you have “banged” you had better be up to date with all your shots.

Anti-Vaxxers and the "Movement"

A destructive meme.

I see that “movement” anti-vaxxers – invariably women, which should tell you something – are up to their old tricks.  I’ve posted on this subject before; here I will emphasize some of the problems anti-vaxxers bring to the “movement.”
There are two viewpoints the anti-vaxxers can take:
1. Vaccines have side effects, you can’t make me or my family take them, and they are useless and do nothing to prevent disease.
2. Vaccines have side effects, you can’t make me or my family take them, although I admit that they can be effective in preventing disease in (most) people who take them.
I’m not going to deal with #1.  The data to support overall vaccine efficacy in decreasing disease is overwhelming.  I’m not going to debate the safety issue, a topic that is dealt with on the Internet in many forums. Instead, I want to look at the philosophical and political implications of viewpoint #2 – vaccines work but some will not take them because of a theoretical (very) low risk and because they value their freedom of choice.
Basically, what #2 is saying is this: I’m going to free-ride on the herd immunity of all those folks who get vaccinated and who subject themselves to the (actually tiny, but in the anti-vaxxers’ “minds” significant) risk of side-effects.  Furthermore, I don’t care if my choice endangers the health of others (*). Hey, if old folks and infants and the immunocompromised die because I want to be a modern-day Typhoid Mary, who cares?  And if I can convince others not to be vaccinated, lowering herd immunity to levels so we get epidemics of preventable diseases, too bad!  Either way I win – either I free-ride on the herd immunity of others, or I normalize and legitimize my decision by getting others to join in, even at the cost of eliminating that herd immunity. That’s my freedom!
Well, freedom cuts both ways. If anti-vaxxers want the freedom to refuse vaccination, the rest of us want freedom from having to live in the same polity as them.  Why is their freedom more important than mine?  The freedom argument falls flat, since they trample on the freedom of others and ignore responsibilities while whining about their rights.
Let’s dig further. The “movement” favors majority rights over minority rights, and often sneers at the over-tolerance of civilized society for all sorts of freakishness. Fair enough. So then, why must the vaccinated majority have to put up with the antics of the anti-vaxxers – their uncaring endangering of public health (*), their bizarre theories, and their wasting of public health resources to deal with preventable diseases? Why should this minority get special treatment, particularly when the scientific facts are against them?
Also consider that free-riding is the deadly enemy of group action, of ethnic genetic interests, and of group evolutionary strategies. Free-riding erodes the sort of public solidarity and investment in collective goods necessary for a group – like the White race – to prosper. By engaging in free-riding, the anti-vaxxers impede White racial solidarity and bolster the anti-Salter, anti-EGI crowd.
Finally, the Right, broadly defined, has a not wholly undeserved reputation for being anti-science, anti-logic, and prone to tin foil hat conspiracy mongering and attachment to loony-tunes theorizing. We certainly don’t need to yet again reinforce that meme by opposing public heath hygiene that uses an invention, derived from the White man’s genius, that has the power to prevent human disease. To the extent that current vaccines are flawed, they need to be improved; however, the answer is not a Luddite retreat that opens us up to (in this case deserved) mocking snarky comments from shtlibs and others of their ilk.
Thus, I assert that the anti-vaccination movement is harmful to White nationalism.
*One of the favorite stupidities from the mendacious anti-vaxxers is to say: “Hey, if your vaccines work so well, what are you worried about?  You get vaccinated and be protected, and leave us alone to get sick if we want.”
Reality: First, there are classes of people who for legitimate reasons – age, allergy, and immunosuppressed condition – cannot be vaccinated and those people need protection by herd immunity. Second, vaccines are not 100% effective, there is individual variation in response, so even if a person is vaccinated, a small possibility remains they can be infected.  Looking at the entire population, the cohort of “vaccinated but still vulnerable” will constitute a significant number of people. However, virtually all vaccines are effective enough for sufficient numbers of immunized people to result in herd immunity and protect those who are still vulnerable despite being vaccinated. Therefore, the anti-vaxxers threaten the heath of those who legitimately cannot be vaccinated as well as those who are vaccinated but not immune.
But, it is even worse than this. One reason why some vaccines are not very effective is that the previously effective vaccines were weakened in response to whining complaints about side-effects (Pertussis vaccine is a good example).  So, the anti-vaxxers screw us over twice. First, by ruining herd immunity by not getting vaccinated and by spreading disease. Second, by forcing the vaccine makers to reduce the efficacy of vaccines so as to reduce side effects complained about by anti-vaxx types – who end up not getting vaccinated anyway.
And of course, the more people are convinced by anti-vaxx propaganda, the less herd immunity exists, the more everyone is endangered, and the greater the pressure to weaken vaccines even more than they are now.  Anti-vaxx decisions are not made in a vacuum.
The next time one of them gives you the “Why are you worried?” shtick, remember all of this.

Pandemic Flu Vaccine, Side Effects, and the East Asian Threat

Why can’t we just avoid disease-ridden Asiatics?

A real vaccine side effect.

This demonstrates that the medical community is willing to discuss vaccine side-effects, when such are real.  This also demonstrates the danger to the world, and to Whites in particular, posed by East Asians. Diseases such as flu typically originate in the filthy and overcrowded colored sewers of East Asia, particularly China, where “people” living in close proximity to pigs and fowl produce the ideal conditions to generate and disseminate viral pandemics. Rather than giving Europeans narcolepsy-inducing vaccinations, perhaps East Asia should be quarantined off from the civilized world?

Of Rights and Retards

Against retardation.

Retard number one:

You are laboring under the delusion that vaccinations, especially of babies and children, have no serious side-effects, and provide a true form of immunity. Have you ever looked into those who claim otherwise? I mean a serious, thorough look.

Yes, I have.  In contrast, have you, seriously and thoroughly, looked at the overwhelming evidence in support of the efficacy and safety of vaccination?  I doubt it.  Newsflash: doctors do not “make money” off of giving vaccinations. I myself have ZERO financial or other incentive. Vaccination (a White invention, albeit that’s irrelevant to this argument) are an amazing human accomplishment. Peoples of the past, desperate to avoid diseases killing their children, would have done virtually anything to have what some today blithely refuse.  Ironically, it is because of vaccination that these diseases have decreased in frequency so as to make people think vaccination is not necessary. And, no, it’s not from “improved hygiene and medical care.”  Our “hygiene and medical care” is as good now as it has ever been but, strangely enough, we are now having measles outbreaks decades after America was declared “measles free.”  Gee…maybe it has to do with the rise of the non-vaccinated, coupled with increased immigration and tourism. Shocking how our “hygiene” and “clean water” don’t compensate for falling vaccination rates.
It’s amazing how people attack vaccines, which are generally very safe and effective, while they happily swallow medications like Adderall or statins, that have frequent side-effects and are of questionable utility to the general population. I speculate that folks have an unconscious aversion to needles – the doctor is “raping” them with the needles, “forcing” things into them. If only the vaccines came in pill form!  Ironically enough, a true example of vaccine side effects (albeit more to others than the vaccine-taker) was with the oral live polio vaccine – the injections of killed polio are safer.  But…needles are scary!

I would “sleep with” an AIDS-“infected” man (provided he was handsome enough) with no “protection” to prove my point. I know I would not “get” AIDS.

Please do.  Really, I would encourage it.  In fact, if it were in my power, I would find many “handsome” AIDS-infected men to sleep with you, unprotected, on a daily basis. The more the better!  And since you obviously don’t believe HIV is in any way harmful (another conspiracy!), then, if and when (hopefully!) you are infected, you will of course eschew medication.  I would very much like to assist in arraigning this experiment.      

Although I wonder: would you disclose your HIV status to any subsequent non-infected “handsome” men who cross your bed?  Or would that violate your libertarian “right to privacy?”  After all, the men make their “free market choice.” Caveat emptor!      
By the way, I haven’t forgotten your previous assertion that you would refuse vaccine if bitten by a rabid animal. That’s another experiment I’d love to arrange (Stronza, meet Cujo!), but first it’s best for you to live some years with HIV and non-medicated.  We would certainly want your immune system to be properly prepared for the rabies virus.

Retard number two:
Your blithe ignorance regarding the dangers of vaccinations suggests that you have willfully swallowed the indoctrination force-fed us by the public schools, the federal government, the pharmaceutical industry (which controls the FDA), and the allopathic medical establishment (now essentially dominated by Jewish money).
Following science is “ignorance.”  Ignoring science in favor of tinfoil hat stupidity is clever. Of course, this is all a “Jewish money” conspiracy.  That’s right.  Right this moment, Moshe Finklestein is here with his briefcase stuffed with cash, giving me my payoff. Strange though that it never works in the other direction.  (Jewish) lawyers of course have no financial incentive to claim vaccine damage and sue, or incentive to clamor for overturning the injury caps set in place to protect vaccine manufacturers from the sort of frivolous lawsuits they were getting over the tetanus vaccine. As well, snake oil salesmen of “natural remedies” have no financial interests in the anti-vax campaign either. It’s just all those Jewish doctors! It’s a plot! A Doctors Plot! Stalin was right!
Statists of your ilk are why some of us might prefer a more libertarian White society which focuses government on the common defense, the administration of justice, and the impartial settling of disputes and in which we could take responsibility for our own choices and not have others’ bad choices forced upon us. This is after all how humans learn, grow, and evolve.
This absolute retard is so overcome with his/her/its hysteria, it didn’t even read what I wrote. What about the rights of others, you moron?  What about responsibility to society?  Don’t want to get vaccinated?  Fine. Live on an isolated commune with your fellow Typhoid Marys. Refuse to do so?  Infect someone?  If they live, you are jailed for assault and battery, perhaps attempted murder. They die?  You get the death penalty for homicide. Want to smoke?  Fine. I smell your smoke, you are jailed for assault and battery. That’s the responsibility for your choices. Your responsibility does not end with yourself. It includes the rights of others. Libertarians are solipsistic, navel-gazing, childish imbeciles, who think the entire world revolves around them and their “rights.”  Guess what?  Others have rights too. The right not to be exposed to your diseases, the right not to inhale your smoke, the right not to pay the social costs of your bad decisions. You are also a hypocrite. You don’t want government to tell you to be vaccinated, but you want the same government to administer “the impartial settling of disputes.”  In other words, if your unvaccinated kid kills my infant with their viruses, you want the government to protect you from my vengeance, and settle the dispute “impartially.”  Coward.  And the fact that you are benefiting from free-riding from the herd immunity of others means you’re a parasitic low-life. That’s why I despise libertarians of your ilk, you lousy bastard.

Enough already with these idiots. Libertarians are no better than feral ghetto Negroes: me, me, me, always rights, never responsibilities, with a sociopathic disregard for the concept that others have rights as well, and a childish disregard for the reality that sometimes rights clash, and society must adjudicate in favor of the interests of the majority.

And it says much about the “movement” – and why I want no part of it – that whenever these issues come up on forums, no one, not once, supports science and the science of vaccination, and no one confronts the libertarians and their navel-gazing conception of “rights.”

Rights, Responsibilities, and Gay Marriage

Comment left at Counter-Currents.

There have been cases where deaf parents have refused to have their deaf children get treatment to restore hearing in order to preserve “deaf culture.” Now, no where in my post did I talk about government coercion. To conflate my positions on these issues with child transgenderism (which I view as mutilation and abuse) is pathetic. However, I morally object to that choice.
My views on these issues are the same on smoking. Rights and responsibilities flow in both directions. if someone chooses to smoke, if they want the right to smoke, then they must be completely responsible for the health consequences and they must ensure that their smoke does not bother non-smokers. Amazingly enough, non-smokers have the same right not to choke on fumes walking down a sidewalk behind a smoker as does the smoker have the right to “enjoy the cigarette.”
Those who enjoy their hearing disability, and refuse treatment, then have the responsibility to navigate through life with ZERO accommodation from society. Those who are deaf through no fault of their own should of course have reasonable accommodation. If we value hearing as normal and deafness as abnormal, withholding treatment from a child is abuse. On the other hand, transgenderism is abnormal, supporting such for a child is also abuse.
Those who believe they have the right to refuse vaccinations also have the responsibility to live out the consequences of their choice. Why should society accommodate them? Fine, let’s not shoot them in a White ethnostate. Instead, they should be shunned and quarantined, and they can live out their lives in small villages, far from civilization. Society has no obligation to accommodate them, to treat their illness, or to risk infection to those who have legitimate reasons for not being vaccinated (age, immune deficiency) or for that minority vaccinated who did not develop immunity.
Libertarian types are funny people. Like Coloreds, they rant about “rights” but never about responsibilities. The same with gays and gay marriage. One thing not mentioned in my essay is the health issue. A major reason for the spread of HIV in America was the spectacularly promiscuous lifestyles of (at least male) homosexuals. After which, they demanded their rights that a large portion of American biomedical research be dedicated to that disease. You see, on their end, all the rights to do as they please, and the burden to deal with the consequences lies with society. Or, like Big Business and their immigration – internalize the benefits and externalize the costs.
Getting back to gays – are gays in gay marriage going to be monogamous? Sure, I know married heterosexuals fool around (I read rates in France are very high for adultery), but there is a big difference between an expectation of monogamy (heterosexual) and the expectation of “let’s have this big campy wedding and thumb our noses at society and then continue to sleep around as before” (homosexual). What homosexuals need to explain is why they NEED marriage, instead of a “civil union” that would provide the same legal benefits. It’s because they DEMAND validation. Just like Bruce Jenner and his very public masquerade as a woman – all the abnormals, the freaks, those who are different, DEMAND that society accommodate and celebrate them. It’s borne out of a bizarre combination of insecurity, arrogance, and resentment. It’s not enough that people do X,Y, Z. All the rest of us not only have to accept it, but celebrate it.

But if they have the right to X,Y,Z, others should have the right to shun X,Y,Z.