Parents Who Shun Vaccines Tend To Cluster, Boosting Children's Risk
179 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Lui2112;47034383]Yes even though your reply has nothing to do with the topic on hand whats your view on the health of our speceies in general. I have to admit i do have logic issues, as well as a slight personality disorder. I Do want to ask you. Why do you seem to hate me to go out of your way to make me seem like i'm a bad person. If i did have a learning disability coming on here trying to paint me as having one would make you really nasty person.[/QUOTE]
Because you [i]are[/i] a bad person? You literally suggest death to people who have what you would deem as weaknesses, much like those people in the world who advocate Eugenics.
Give me a list of 5 weaknesses that should be excised from humanity.
Also our health as a species is phenomenal, we live to 80 years old pretty regularly when making it past 30 would have been a glorious achievement a few thousand years ago.
[editline]29th January 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Lui2112;47034423]Everything starts as a belief. The people who founded some of the first medicines must of believed they can prevent sickness so tried to find a cure. Do you agree with me here?[/QUOTE]
Climb out of your own ass kid, everything might have it's origins as an idea, but not all ideas are created equal.
[QUOTE=Lui2112;47034423]Everything starts as a belief. The people who founded some of the first medicines must of believed they can prevent sickness so tried to find a cure. Do you agree with me here?[/QUOTE]
yes but those beliefs had basis's in reality using more scientific views of things. you so far, have bascially just been saying everything everyone know about medicine is wrong, and you know the truth.
maybe you do, but I doubt it because firstly, you haven't demonstrated any of that knowledge, secondly, because our scientific and medical history is ancient and very, very strong. What we know about the human body now is better than ever before.
[editline]29th January 2015[/editline]
also yeah, you're basically promoting eugenics, not evolution.
[QUOTE=Lui2112;47034423]More nonsense[/QUOTE]
We're not being punished for "cheating nature" it's called bacteria and viruses. Every single animal has to deal with these nasty little fuckers and they all usually die horribly to their own version of the flu. We are subject to basically the same things that other animals face, it's just that we cure them before they could kill us, so no, we aren't being punished, and I'm pretty sure you're also pretty unhealthy compared to the "genetically superior" or "more evolved" humans or whatever bull you're passing up, you've likely been vaxx'd yourself, hell, most VERY healthy humans have been vaccinated for the past 100 years. so if we let sick people die, everyone would die, very slowly, very painfully, if we adhere to your terrible basis, the human race wouldn't be where we are today.
You know we are? [B]SOCIAL ANIMALS[/B], [B]SOCIAL ANIMALS[/B] care for each other, we don't just let each other die. [B]SOCIAL ANIMALS[/B] find [B]any way necessary to help each other survive[/B] that's why we're [B]SOCIAL ANIMALS[/B]. Now what you're putting WOULD be pretty goddamn unnatural to do as humans because [B]We evolved to care for each other[/B] something you don't seem to get.
[editline]29th January 2015[/editline]
Also this is so derailed it might as well be in the next star system. I think this should go to the debate forum.
[QUOTE=Rapscallion92;47034427]Because you [i]are[/i] a bad person? You literally suggest death to people who have what you would deem as weaknesses, much like those people in the world who advocate Eugenics.
Give me a list of 5 weaknesses that should be excised from humanity.
Also our health as a species is phenomenal, we live to 80 years old pretty regularly when making it past 30 would have been a glorious achievement a few thousand years ago.
[editline]29th January 2015[/editline]
Climb out of your own ass kid, everything might have it's origins as an idea, but not all ideas are created equal.[/QUOTE]
I don't suggest death. No one wants to die. I'm merely taking the view point of if we didn't have civilisation were left to natures devices we'd be kill off very fast. This my only point.
You say our health is phenomenal, but you just mentioned age as your barometer for phenomenal. In my opinion phenomenal health is to feel great and not get any type of basic sickness(I've not had as much as a cold in 5 years). I'm sure that's what would be natural based definition of health.
Was the idea to invent medicine from the fear of knowing that we're not healthy enough to survive out in nature. Does this explain peoples hysterics over news articles like this. It won't kill them, but, might show them the inconvenient truth of the limits of our true healthcare capacities?
[QUOTE=Lui2112;47034568]I don't suggest death. No one wants to die. I'm merely taking the view point of if we didn't have civilisation were left to natures devices we'd be kill off very fast. This my only point.
You say our health is phenomenal, but you just mentioned age as your barometer for phenomenal. In my opinion phenomenal health is to feel great and not get any type of basic sickness(I've not had as much as a cold in 5 years). I'm sure that's what would be natural based definition of health.
Was the idea to invent medicine from the fear of knowing that we're not healthy enough to survive out in nature. Does this explain peoples hysterics over news articles like this. It won't kill them, but, might show them the inconvenient truth of the limits of our true healthcare capacities?[/QUOTE]
If we were left to nature's devices in, say , our natural habitat, west Africa, we would still be pretty alright, but the thing is that we evolved to go "away from nature" for the past 100,000 years. Our healthcare has a pretty high-up limit as far as we're concerned. It's just that our misuse of antibiotics is creating superbugs, which is shit, but as far as we have seen, the limit is not even close to being reached.
[editline]29th January 2015[/editline]
[quote]Was the idea to invent medicine from the fear of knowing that we're not healthy enough to survive out in nature. Does this explain peoples hysterics over news articles like this. It won't kill them, but, might show them the inconvenient truth of the limits of our true healthcare capacities? [/quote]
Everything that gives us diseases are usually organisms themselves, and as long as they're organisms, we're going to find ways to keep them back until we go extinct.
[editline]29th January 2015[/editline]
Shit I just now noticed the debate section has been removed, oh well
[QUOTE=andololol;47034532]We're not being punished for "cheating nature" it's called bacteria and viruses. Every single animal has to deal with these nasty little fuckers and they all usually die horribly to their own version of the flu. We are subject to basically the same things that other animals face, it's just that we cure them before they could kill us, so no, we aren't being punished, and I'm pretty sure you're also pretty unhealthy compared to the "genetically superior" or "more evolved" humans or whatever bull you're passing up, you've likely been vaxx'd yourself, hell, most VERY healthy humans have been vaccinated for the past 100 years. so if we let sick people die, everyone would die, very slowly, very painfully, if we adhere to your terrible basis, the human race wouldn't be where we are today.
You know we are? [B]SOCIAL ANIMALS[/B], [B]SOCIAL ANIMALS[/B] care for each other, we don't just let each other die. [B]SOCIAL ANIMALS[/B] find [B]any way necessary to help each other survive[/B] that's why we're [B]SOCIAL ANIMALS[/B]. Now what you're putting WOULD be pretty goddamn unnatural to do as humans because [B]We evolved to care for each other[/B] something you don't seem to get.
[editline]29th January 2015[/editline]
Also this is so derailed it might as well be in the next star system. I think this should go to the debate forum.[/QUOTE]
See I know that. We're social animals I agree. Are you going to the nearest hospital to meet with the doctors there, and try find the cure for everybody there. Would you even just visit every patient and tell them i wish them well and that they'll get better? Other people are finding the cure, dealing with sick people. Your not actively contributing to that your words and actions are inconsistent you're just [I]quoting[/I] my forum posts, and then making them up.
I don't won't any one to die unnecessary. Nor do i disagree with vaccines as a current solution
[QUOTE=Lui2112;47034568]I don't suggest death. No one wants to die. I'm merely taking the view point of if we didn't have civilisation were left to natures devices we'd be kill off very fast. This my only point.
You say our health is phenomenal, but you just mentioned age as your barometer for phenomenal. In my opinion phenomenal health is to feel great and not get any type of basic sickness(I've not had as much as a cold in 5 years). I'm sure that's what would be natural based definition of health.
Was the idea to invent medicine from the fear of knowing that we're not healthy enough to survive out in nature. Does this explain peoples hysterics over news articles like this. It won't kill them, but, might show them the inconvenient truth of the limits of our true healthcare capacities?[/QUOTE]
No we wouldn't, dude just stop literally every single thing you say is wrong.
Why would humans suddenly die off? We are pretty much exactly the same as our ancestors from 10,000 years ago, they survived so effectively that there are now 7 billion of us despite nature trying it's best to wipe us out between endless plagues.
Medicine was invented because some people decided that an infected wound shouldn;t be a death sentence and that they're like to see their people survive.
Also our healthcare is going strength to strength, we are are the point where we can grow new organs in a lab, just this month we managed to grow an entire Human Digestive Tract in a mouse.
Also just so you know, there's an actual shit ton of animals that self medicate, surely elephants are too weak to survive the world right?
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoopharmacognosy[/url]
Mate, get out my face and educate yourself.
Also if by your retard logic, we were incapable of surviving in the wilds of the world, which is sheer comedy at it's best, how the fuck did we advance to the point where we developed civilisation if we were too weak to survive? It's a Catch 22.
[editline]29th January 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Lui2112;47034648]See I know that. We're social animals I agree. Are you going to the nearest hospital to meet with the doctors there, and try find the cure for everybody there. Would you even just visit every patient and tell them i wish them well and that they'll get better? Other people are finding the cure, dealing with sick people. Your not actively contributing to that your words and actions are inconsistent you're just [I]quoting[/I] my forum posts, and then making them up.
I don't won't any one to die unnecessary. Nor do i disagree with vaccines as a current solution[/QUOTE]
Invent a better solution that vaccines then, best of luck because they are ball shatteringly effective.
[QUOTE=Lui2112;47034568]I'm merely taking the view point of if we didn't have civilisation were left to natures devices we'd be kill off very fast. This my only point.[/QUOTE]
Well your point is wrong. Humans have become the defacto dominant species on the planet because we're so adaptable and because we're surprisingly durable.
[QUOTE]You say our health is phenomenal, but you just mentioned age as your barometer for phenomenal. In my opinion phenomenal health is to feel great and not get any type of basic sickness(I've not had as much as a cold in 5 years). I'm sure that's what would be natural based definition of health.[/QUOTE]
Life expectancy is a very good barometer of health because it's essentially gauging average health. There are some things it doesn't explicitly cover however. For example in the last several centuries our average life expectancy has risen the most from our infant mortality rates dropping like a stone. That happened from our medical science. Even in the 1300s or earlier, if you actually made it to adulthood you could expect to live to your 40s or maybe even 50s easily enough. But the two key factors were, as I said, infant mortality and then childhood.
These numbers aren't accurate but last I heard something like 60% of infants died at or around childbirth and then something like 40% of the survivors died before ever reaching adulthood. For that 40% who survived childbirth it was more often than not disease and illness that got them. This is no longer such a big concern. Why? Because of our vastly improved medical knowledge. Vaccines in particular being a big one.
[QUOTE=andololol;47034607]If we were left to nature's devices in, say , our natural habitat, west Africa, we would still be pretty alright, but the thing is that we evolved to go "away from nature" for the past 100,000 years. Our healthcare has a pretty high-up limit as far as we're concerned. It's just that our misuse of antibiotics is creating superbugs, which is shit, but as far as we have seen, the limit is not even close to being reached.
[editline]29th January 2015[/editline]
Everything that gives us diseases are usually organisms themselves, and as long as they're organisms, we're going to find ways to keep them back until we go extinct.
[editline]29th January 2015[/editline]
Shit I just now noticed the debate section has been removed, oh well[/QUOTE]
Well that's the point right there. "we evolved to go "away from nature". So we as humans care to much for health and not dying. If we move away from nature, and we have unhealthy diets lifestyles, environments . Yet we've created a dissonance between what we can realistically achieve with true human health. Everybody seems so concerned but its always placid. Accept our il-health as a species or change it.
[QUOTE=Lui2112;47034726]Well that's the point right there. "we evolved to go "away from nature". So we as humans care to much for health and not dying. If we move away from nature, and we have unhealthy diets lifestyles, environments . Yet we've created a dissonance between what we can realistically achieve with true human health. Everybody seems so concerned but its always placid. Accept our il-health as a species or change it.[/QUOTE]
Right, I'm gonna be totally honest now, this sentence was word salad.
[quote]Yet we've created a dissonance between what we can realistically achieve with true human health. Everybody seems so concerned but its always placid. Accept our il-health as a species or change it.[/quote]
Define True Human Health, seriously what the fuck do you even mean?
[QUOTE=Rapscallion92;47034657]No we wouldn't, dude just stop literally every single thing you say is wrong.
Why would humans suddenly die off? We are pretty much exactly the same as our ancestors from 10,000 years ago, they survived so effectively that there are now 7 billion of us despite nature trying it's best to wipe us out between endless plagues.
Medicine was invented because some people decided that an infected wound shouldn;t be a death sentence and that they're like to see their people survive.
Also our healthcare is going strength to strength, we are are the point where we can grow new organs in a lab, just this month we managed to grow an entire Human Digestive Tract in a mouse.
Also just so you know, there's an actual shit ton of animals that self medicate, surely elephants are too weak to survive the world right?
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoopharmacognosy[/url]
Mate, get out my face and educate yourself.
Also if by your retard logic, we were incapable of surviving in the wilds of the world, which is sheer comedy at it's best, how the fuck did we advance to the point where we developed civilisation if we were too weak to survive? It's a Catch 22.
[editline]29th January 2015[/editline]
Invent a better solution that vaccines then, best of luck because they are ball shatteringly effective.[/QUOTE]
If we was to put you out in the wilds of africa. I bet you you'd die very fast.All of your posts seem to suggest your very angry at me. Like your insecure that nature is more powerful holistic package than modern medicine will ever be. Every pharmaceutical drugs as a side effect, so even our great life savers can make us feel bad.
All these facts your bombarding me are interesting, and I've not said our healthcare is bad. I'm not saying humans are unintelligent. Yet you seem the need to prove to me something I wasn't even arguing against.
The organ being grown inside a mouse is just messed up. It's animal abuse. That kind of science is great, and I'd find it just as interesting as you, but you can't argue that as a species were relying exclusively on new inventions just to get by another generation.
Now you using the excuse of other animals medicate so it's natural for us too. Don't forget we influence the planet on a extremely high level. Chemicals, pollution, atmosphere. We don't know if animals, (and i quote the wiki article you linked, "non-human animals apparently self medicate"), have done such since the beginning of the their existences.
Humans could survive out in the wild but we'd have to relearn everything if we had to and a lot of humans would just die off very fast in such scenarios, you'd probably be of the first to die. Humans are cunning, and clever. The question what are interesting to me is are we really intelligent and wise as we should be.
[editline]29th January 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Rapscallion92;47034753]Right, I'm gonna be totally honest now, this sentence was word salad.
Define True Human Health, seriously what the fuck do you even mean?[/QUOTE]
Your being totally honest now. So you've being lying to me and calling me insulting words and claiming I'm wrong was a lie?.
I'm talking the quality of life, not the quantity. It's all well and good being able to live on medications and live to 80, but are they living happy. I have immense personal experience in this.
There's a difference between Surviving and thriving.
[QUOTE=Lui2112;47034871]Stuff[/QUOTE]
You're right in one way, if we were wiser there wouldn't be anti-vaxxers because they'd know that it isn't as harmful as they think it is, and there wouldn't be people who undermine our current technologies in favor of a "more natural" approach.
Also, for that rat thing, sure it's animal abuse, but it has a very short lifespan, and if it wasn't for its lab use, it would be bugging the ever loving hell out of us, spreading disease and making our lives shitty, so it's a trade off. Better life for a shitty, short lived creature, making our lives shitty, or use this creature to our advantage, to see what works.
[QUOTE=Alice3173;47034722]Well your point is wrong. Humans have become the defacto dominant species on the planet because we're so adaptable and because we're surprisingly durable.
Life expectancy is a very good barometer of health because it's essentially gauging average health. There are some things it doesn't explicitly cover however. For example in the last several centuries our average life expectancy has risen the most from our infant mortality rates dropping like a stone. That happened from our medical science. Even in the 1300s or earlier, if you actually made it to adulthood you could expect to live to your 40s or maybe even 50s easily enough. But the two key factors were, as I said, infant mortality and then childhood.
These numbers aren't accurate but last I heard something like 60% of infants died at or around childbirth and then something like 40% of the survivors died before ever reaching adulthood. For that 40% who survived childbirth it was more often than not disease and illness that got them. This is no longer such a big concern. Why? Because of our vastly improved medical knowledge. Vaccines in particular being a big one.[/QUOTE]
Well we are the defacto species. Our existence could be wrong. We certainly display in our attitudes, behaviours and actions towards our fellow species members, and animals a lot of violence and hatred.
You say were dominant species but were not dominant at all. even a very ahtletic human would have a very hard time dominate even basic land animals like deers, zebras. Against true predators we'd stand no chance. What's made us dominance is our master of technology, but that's not made as dominate animals, just shielded people.
Life expectancy is good. I agree. As i mentioned to the other poster. Life quality is better than like quantity. you can ask many people the question. Would they prefer 10 good years or 20 bad years.
You may life an extra time living, but it doesn't guarantee you can enjoy it truely.
[QUOTE=Lui2112;47034871]
Your being totally honest now. So you've being lying to me and calling me insulting words and claiming I'm wrong was a lie?.
I'm talking the quality of life, not the quantity. It's all well and good being able to live on medications and live to 80, but are they living happy. I have immense personal experience in this.
There's a difference between Surviving and thriving.[/QUOTE]
We are thriving, if you haven't looked out the window, or at least, even looked at other people, you see this:
[t]http://health.gov/paguidelines/blog/image.axd?picture=2011%2F1%2FAsian+family+on+bikes.jpg[/t]
and think that they aren't living happily? Quality of life doesn't JUST come from medication, it comes from diet and exercise PLUS a healthy social habit, all of them that for most people is a life choice.
Also, how old are you that you have gained enough "personal experience" to know what you're saying is true? at the moment I'm assuming you're in your late teens/early adulthood like a majority of people on this forum, including myself.
Quality of life comes from more than just medicine, it also comes from location, infrastructure, habits, personal outlook, a lot of things that you aren't taking into account.
[B]Also don't mind that I'm using a stock photo, it's an example, I'm gonna bold this just so you don't miss it.[/B]
[QUOTE=andololol;47034924]You're right in one way, if we were wiser there wouldn't be anti-vaxxers because they'd know that it isn't as harmful as they think it is, and there wouldn't be people who undermine our current technologies in favor of a "more natural" approach.
Also, for that rat thing, sure it's animal abuse, but it has a very short lifespan, and if it wasn't for its lab use, it would be bugging the ever loving hell out of us, spreading disease and making our lives shitty, so it's a trade off. Better life for a shitty, short lived creature, making our lives shitty, or use this creature to our advantage, to see what works.[/QUOTE]
We don't know that. Who made us god to determine between what dies, and what doesn't. Maybe nature is using us for it's advantage, to see what works? Based on mankind's extreme need to control and manipulate nature to resist it. I'd say were being tested on already.
[QUOTE=Lui2112;47034952]You say were dominant species but were not dominant at all. even a very ahtletic human would have a very hard time dominate even basic land animals like deers, zebras. Against true predators we'd stand no chance. What's made us dominance is our master of technology, but that's not made as dominate animals, just shielded people.[/QUOTE]
Apparently you're out of the loop but humans are considered the penultimate apex predator and for good reason. An animal can be as strong and fast as you want but a human can use its brain to find a way to kill it. Physical prowess has less to do with dominance than you think. It's just the easiest path to dominance is all.
[QUOTE]Life expectancy is good. I agree. As i mentioned to the other poster. Life quality is better than like quantity. you can ask many people the question. Would they prefer 10 good years or 20 bad years.
You may life an extra time living, but it doesn't guarantee you can enjoy it truely.[/QUOTE]
Okay, I don't disagree that 10 good years is better than 20 bad years. I have a question though: Why are you assuming that our medical advances have resulted only in bad years added to our life expectancies?
[QUOTE]You say were dominant species but were not dominant at all. even a very ahtletic human would have a very hard time dominate even basic land animals like deers, zebras. Against true predators we'd stand no chance. What's made us dominance is our master of technology, but that's not made as dominate animals, just shielded people.[/QUOTE]
Yes, our dominance does come from our wits, THATS WHAT MAKES US DOMINANT, we have NO regular predators, NOTHING hunts us, and we HAVE instilled evolutionary fear in large AND small animals because of how badass we were AND are now. put a lone human with a spear against a lion, and we will win, hell, give us a stick or a bush, something natural, and we will use it to our advantage against such a thing. We took our ONLY predator, the wolf, and domesticated it, we are on top. Our aggression is just a remnant of what we once were, but we don't need it anymore.
[QUOTE]We don't know that. Who made us god to determine between what dies, and what doesn't. Maybe nature is using us for it's advantage, to see what works? Based on mankind's extreme need to control and manipulate nature to resist it. I'd say were being tested on already. [/QUOTE]
Because animals already decide who lives and dies by their own hands. Ever see a pride of lions going after the strongest buck? No? Of course, it's because they go after the old, young, weak, anything that is an easier target, and as animals we have the same rights, as we can make those decisions. Also you talk about Nature as if it's some kind of god putting us to the test.
[QUOTE=andololol;47034983]We are thriving, if you haven't looked out the window, or at least, even looked at other people, you see this:
[t]http://health.gov/paguidelines/blog/image.axd?picture=2011%2F1%2FAsian+family+on+bikes.jpg[/t]
and think that they aren't living happily? Quality of life doesn't JUST come from medication, it comes from diet and exercise PLUS a healthy social habit, all of them that for most people is a life choice.
Also, how old are you that you have gained enough "personal experience" to know what you're saying is true? at the moment I'm assuming you're in your late teens/early adulthood like a majority of people on this forum, including myself.
Quality of life comes from more than just medicine, it also comes from location, infrastructure, habits, personal outlook, a lot of things that you aren't taking into account.
[B]Also don't mind that I'm using a stock photo, it's an example, I'm gonna bold this just so you don't miss it.[/B][/QUOTE]
Yes i encompass all of that in the determination of quality of life. A lot of that all comes down to brain chemistry, because that's what gives you the perceptions of happy, sad, hopeless, hopeful.
I know it's a stock photo I was going to say. It's kind of meant to look happy, it could be forced happy lol.
[QUOTE=Lui2112;47035026]Yes i encompass all of that in the determination of quality of life. A lot of that all comes down to brain chemistry, because that's what gives you the perceptions of happy, sad, hopeless, hopeful.
[/QUOTE]
What are you getting at? Of course emotion comes from chemicals. If it didn't we wouldn't even have a definition for happiness!
What's your point in arguing happiness if you're just going to denote it as "just brain chemistry"? Also, another point, your experience is too anecdotal to be even valid, as you could be living a a pretty shitty life, while most others who are doing the right thing plus happen to live in the right place are pretty damn happy.
[QUOTE=Alice3173;47035005]Apparently you're out of the loop but humans are considered the penultimate apex predator and for good reason. An animal can be as strong and fast as you want but a human can use its brain to find a way to kill it. Physical prowess has less to do with dominance than you think. It's just the easiest path to dominance is all.
Okay, I don't disagree that 10 good years is better than 20 bad years. I have a question though: Why are you assuming that our medical advances have resulted only in bad years added to our life expectancies?[/QUOTE]
No I know they are. I wonder how many people who founded that idea actually tested it out. Animals don't have an involved brain like humans. To pair a modern day human, with a primitive un evolved species would be unfair. I'm sure there's many alien species what know we exist and would make our technology look caveman like.
The harsh toxicology effect on the humans as much as it pollutes the earth the water, the soil, the air. Not to mention the industry behind making it. The toxic affect of man made chemicals could need to be upgraded just to bypass more resistance.
[QUOTE=Lui2112;47035122]No I know they are. I wonder how many people who founded that idea actually tested it out. Animals don't have an involved brain like humans. To pair a modern day human, with a primitive un evolved species would be unfair. I'm sure there's many alien species what know we exist and would make our technology look caveman like.
The harsh toxicology effect on the humans as much as it pollutes the earth the water, the soil, the air. Not to mention the industry behind making it. The toxic affect of man made chemicals could need to be upgraded just to bypass more resistance.[/QUOTE]
It's demonstrated literally every time an animal is born on a farm, slaughtered in a slaughter house and the fact that we are driving species to an extinction on par with mass extinctions.
Also stop talking about pollution, you just sound like you're starting to feel two tabs of acid.
[QUOTE=Rapscallion92;47035234]It's demonstrated literally every time an animal is born on a farm, slaughtered in a slaughter house and the fact that we are driving species to an extinction on par with mass extinctions.
Also stop talking about pollution, you just sound like you're starting to feel two tabs of acid.[/QUOTE]
Is that okay with you?
[QUOTE=Lui2112;47035327]Is that okay with you?[/QUOTE]
Yeah it's absolutely fine with me, it's just not the ideal thing to do when you're debating a topic.
[QUOTE=Lui2112;47034726]Well that's the point right there. "we evolved to go "away from nature". So we as humans care to much for health and not dying. If we move away from nature, and we have unhealthy diets lifestyles, environments . Yet we've created a dissonance between what we can realistically achieve with true human health. Everybody seems so concerned but its always placid. Accept our il-health as a species or change it.[/QUOTE]
there is no such thing as "going away from nature" as if it can happen, it's natural.
[editline]29th January 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Lui2112;47034871]If we was to put you out in the wilds of africa. I bet you you'd die very fast.All of your posts seem to suggest your very angry at me. Like your insecure that nature is more powerful holistic package than modern medicine will ever be. Every pharmaceutical drugs as a side effect, so even our great life savers can make us feel bad.[/QUOTE]
If you dropped people in the african wildnerness people might die because of a variety of reasons, primarily that we no longer need to live in that environment and thus don't teach ourselves those skills. Sure, nature would woop some peoples asses, but it sure isn't due to the medicated nature of modern society. People would actually live longer now than they would have 2000 years ago if we're talking about the risk from disease. A modern man stuck in that environment, treated by the medical system that's aware of where he's going, will be perfectly adapted through technology to the diseases he might face. That's far better than anyone in history would get.
[QUOTE]All these facts your bombarding me are interesting, and I've not said our healthcare is bad. I'm not saying humans are unintelligent. Yet you seem the need to prove to me something I wasn't even arguing against.[/QUOTE]
You're arguing, as best as anyone can tell through your fractured english, that medicine and technology have made man weak in the face of "nature". This is patently untrue as our way of conquering nature is precisely through technology and intelligence. Survival of the fittest for humans doesn't mean what it means for many, many other species. Fittest, as it's used in the sentence refers to how well it "Fits" inside the puzzle, not how strong or capable the being is.
[QUOTE]The organ being grown inside a mouse is just messed up. It's animal abuse. That kind of science is great, and I'd find it just as interesting as you, but you can't argue that as a species were relying exclusively on new inventions just to get by another generation.[/QUOTE]
It may be some form of animal abuse if you should classify it as such. So what? We were relying on new inventions since the dawn of man. Fire? Cooking? Clothing? We used herbs and plants as medicines(which many modern variations are derived from). Your view point, as best I can tell, is one based on historical ignorance of what has allowed us to become this prolific.
[QUOTE]Now you using the excuse of other animals medicate so it's natural for us too. Don't forget we influence the planet on a extremely high level. Chemicals, pollution, atmosphere. We don't know if animals, (and i quote the wiki article you linked, "non-human animals apparently self medicate"), have done such since the beginning of the their existences.[/QUOTE]
This is entirely unrelated to anything in the entire discussion or to the idea of animals self medicating.
[QUOTE]Humans could survive out in the wild but we'd have to relearn everything if we had to and a lot of humans would just die off very fast in such scenarios, you'd probably be of the first to die. Humans are cunning, and clever. The question what are interesting to me is are we really intelligent and wise as we should be[/QUOTE].
You would die as well as every other person set to the situation because you're not really going to be better adapted just because you reject modern medicine. It gives you no edge. Sure, the skills needed to survive in a different type of world would be helpful, that's not an edge on "Nature" like existence though.
[QUOTE]Your being totally honest now. So you've being lying to me and calling me insulting words and claiming I'm wrong was a lie?.
[/QUOTE]
Childish word games.
[QUOTE]I'm talking the quality of life, not the quantity. It's all well and good being able to live on medications and live to 80, but are they living happy. I have immense personal experience in this. [/QUOTE]
There are people in there 80's and 90's who are fit and healthy and are doing quite a lot of activity. My father is in his 70's and is doing quite well, why? Modern medicine has been keeping him going, modern knowledge about food has kept him eating right, modern knowledge, not ancient or "natural" knowledge.
[QUOTE]There's a difference between Surviving and thriving.[/QUOTE]
Yes and we are thriving in a way humanity has never been.
[editline]29th January 2015[/editline]
Not that you'll read that and reply as you ignored my last thought our argument against you.
Glad to know there's a correlation between anti-vaxxers and posting quality.
Does getting vaccinated make you a better poster?
[QUOTE=Tetsmega;47036214]Glad to know there's a correlation between anti-vaxxers and posting quality.
Does getting vaccinated make you a better poster?[/QUOTE]
Sadly, there hasn't been a vaccination for stupidity yet
:(
[QUOTE=Tetsmega;47036214]Glad to know there's a correlation between anti-vaxxers and posting quality.
Does getting vaccinated make you a better poster?[/QUOTE]
I'm vaccinated for all of western societies current concerned vaccines, including measles. Who's the anti-vaxxer. Do we just have anti-thinkers.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.