Tech takes heat as anti-vaxers go viral

Lawmakers and public health advocates are pressuring tech companies to crack down on anti-vaccine content proliferating online, which they fear is contributing to a massive measles outbreak in the United States.

Experts attribute the outbreak to the increasing number of "anti-vaxers," people who don't vaccinate their children. And they warn the movement is largely using social media to promote their views, for example via YouTube videos and Facebook discussion groups.

Tech giants say they are taking the issue seriously even as they grapple with competing demands between promoting public health and protecting free speech.

thehill.com/policy/technology/431505-tech-takes-heat-as-anti-vaxers-go-viral

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-02-26 at 2.19.56 PM.png (642x362, 304.73K)

Other urls found in this thread:

hrsa.gov/sites/default/files/hrsa/vaccine-compensation/data/monthly-stats-january-2019.pdf
qwant.com/
duckduckgo.com/
startpage.com/
ixquick.com
searx.me/
ecosia.org
search.yacy.net/
goodgopher.com/
bing.com/
gab.ai/
shitposters.club/
sealion.club/
freezepeach.xyz/
voat.co/
iscute.moe/
social.ufeff.club/
d.tube/
bit.tube/
brighteon.com/
invidio.us/
pe.ertu.be
ugetube.com
hooktube.com/
liveleak.com/
bitchute.com/
minds.com/
streambotz.com/
unseen.is/
signal.org/
freedom.social/
mastodon.social/
steemit.com/
joindiaspora.com/
snabbo.com/
medium.com/
spreely.com/
archive.is/GruFU
lawandorder.fandom.com/wiki/Selfish

“I know my child better than the doctor”
Lady, personality is not a factor in whether you contract an autoimmune disease. I think the doctor knows better than you, especially when everything u know about the subject is off Wikipedia.

At least wikipedia is valid and sourced.

People like this get everything they know from Fox News.

If you don't get your child vaccinated then you are putting them at risk as well as other people.

Why would other people be at risk, didn't they get their vaccines?

Why (((indeed)))

If they had the slightest understanding of the (((vaccine deniers))) they would know that this will only entrench them further.

And what if the antivaxxers are actually wrong, and the point is to galvanise them so that they can be taken out by a disease everyone else is immune to?
I don't know what to believe.
To vax or not to vax?

It's a population control program.

Attached: ef6a90795249f81088687b4460e6ce4acdd41ca68c122b0c10cb07adf9d7f5fd.jpg (1024x771 135.13 KB, 100.41K)

The fact that vaccinated people and those who create vaccines and push them on all of us are afraid of unvaccinated people is proof to me that vaccines don't do anything at all.

Think about it, if vaccines actually work, all the vaccinated people will be totally fine and never get sick, and all the people who didn't get vaccinated will all simply get sick or die. If people who are vaccinated are afraid of those who did not vaccinate, then vaccines must not actually do anything.

toddlers too young to be vaccinated can die from contact with older unvaccinated carriers of diseases. You're welcome, Moshe.

Attached: around bait hesitate.png (436x432, 45.17K)

Oh they do something all right, they just don't actually protect against the diseases they claim to.


This is the biggest load of horseshit I have ever heard, Hymie.

Or die from viruses they've contracted from vaccinated people who are currently undergoing viral shedding which happens all the time with live virus vaccines.
Vaxxers are becoming some of the most disgusting fear mongers of the modern day who ironically play a large role in modern viral outbreaks.

Hey guys, I found this huge elephant in the room concerning bacteriological eugenics through forced mass migration orchestrated by jewish demons…where do I put it?

Attached: I hate stock pics.jpg (1300x1390, 93.88K)

That'd be true if everyone could be vaccinated. If someone has a latex allergy or are immune compromised then they are suggested not to get vaccinated unless it's the nasal spray for the former. People care because if those individuals come in contact with the virus they will not be protected like any other vaccinated person would be.
Herd immunity depends on the herd immunity threshold (HIT) calculated for a specific virus or bacteria. If we get the number of the people vaccinated for a particular disease to the HIT, then those who are not vaccinated have a much greater chance of living.
Thanks to anti-vaxxers we are now seeing outbreaks of diseases which we had under control for decades. While I believe it should be completely fine to say whatever unsourced crap you want to, it should be law that everyone that can be vaccinated should be vaccinated unless there is a medical issue barring them from doing so.
The good outweighs the bad for vaccines, if you are paranoid about what is in a particular vaccine you could always read up on it and understand the immune system.

kek

In some rare cases for live vaccines, such as oral polio vaccine, you can have it mutate while in vivo and cause paralytic polio, due to this vaccine manufacturers have moved away from using a live attenuated virus for the polio vaccine; instead they use an inactivated one.
Since vaccines don't bankrupt you to obtain them, have a high fidelity, and complications are usually mild and rare even at that, what would you prefer instead to prevent contagious diseases?

Given over seventy two million dollars has been paid in compensation for vaccine injuries since the beginning of 2019 it's getting harder to believe the bullshit you're spreading.
hrsa.gov/sites/default/files/hrsa/vaccine-compensation/data/monthly-stats-january-2019.pdf
I'll stay away from the seemingly endless anecdotes too but I've argued with people like you many times before, we both know neither of us will change each others minds. The difference is, if people like you get your way then everyone else is to be injected with poison by force under the fraud that we're essentially living in the time of the bubonic plague and only vaccines are keeping us from total oblivion. I find that to be nothing short of evil.
Whereas I see humans and every other species having done pretty well without something invented only decades ago and would attribute the decline in disease from vastly improved hygiene and living standards.
God forbid questioning something like the wholesale import of third world maybe playing a role in any increase in the spreading of diseases too.

You've pointed out that there are repercussions for creating vaccines that cause harm or have undesirable side effects, that's probably why the vaccine industry that makes them tries to reduce those incidences.
It's the conclusion we came to using evidence. If you don't want to believe that you're doing yourself a disservice instead of challenging the claims I made using your own evidence.
That's not the point, if you came to me with credible evidence or I found it on my own I would use that to understand what the most parsimonious answer is even if it's not complete or something I personally like.
You seem to be very critical of a tried and tested method for disease prevention. Humanity has improved vaccines to be less harmful and maximize benefits. As long as regulatory bodies exist that test and make sure vaccines are safe then arguing otherwise would be disingenuous.
With the exception of a few diseases, many don't kill (too many) of their hosts rapidly enough to cause wide spread death or cause permanent debilitation. Usually the people who die from contagious diseases are old, newborn, or immune compromised. Killing or debilitating your host isn't the best for proliferating and passing on the genetic material necessary to continue that particular form of life, however, due to random mutation it can happen. To prevent disease, permanent bodily damage, and death from any contagious disease, including the ones with a lower mortality rate, we vaccinate. Rarely do we get a disease like the bubonic plague or Spanish flu that kills a large percentage of a population, but just in case we also have a vaccine for those as well.
As we create vaccines, we don't halt natural selection. It's also possible for diseases to reemerge once they are (knowingly) wiped out. This is why we have to study how diseases spread and the most efficient methods for preventing them. More effective and safer vaccines are within this field of study, which is why vaccines, like any field in science, usually is going to be the best answer at our disposal for dealing with contagious disease.
See pic related.
I disagree, but I guess I should just get used to certain contagious disease death rates climbing back to pre-vaccine levels seeing as you don't want to vaccinate over your misplaced fear.
Interesting hypothesis, now you just need to test it and back it with evidence. While those factors definitely helped prevent the spread of contagious disease within communities, vaccines played a direct role in reducing the amount of death that occurred during outbreaks of specific diseases.
Another great hypothesis, test it and back it up and the scientific community will ravage your paper's asshole about it, however, if it's sound science it will probably get through the peer review process and be accepted as such once other pieces of literature (by you or others) recreate and support your claims.

Attached: cdr.png (570x929, 37.89K)

Vaccines aren't regulated the way other drugs are. You don't know what they're putting into them and they don't need to be critically examined. Basically everything you're saying Vaccines do is unsupported by the evidence because what vaccines are is intentionally obscured.

You're correct, it's even more rigorous of an approval process.
Objectively false. Whether or not something in the vaccine is harmful is another question which is addressed through multiple steps.
Also not true. We back up each type of vaccine with trials, similar to how you regulate other types of medicine. Do you believe what you're saying is supported by evidence? If so you should put it to the test by having others review your claim like I am doing now.
Now that claim you will have to support with evidence because without it, it's just an opinionated concern. You're free to make it, however, I can't take a claim like that seriously until you back it up with evidence.
Seeing as you read through my reply so fast you should speed through this info-graphic which presents the steps it will take for a vaccine to be approved for release.

Attached: vri.png (650x1740, 825.41K)

You're wrong. The image you yourself posted mentions that no long-term affects are studied because none are anticipated.
Also its no wonder studies and charts made by the vaccine industry would say that they're safe and harmless and you have nothing to worry about goy. I wonder if you are unable to think critically or if you are just paid to control the narrative.

Professionals have a good idea how vaccines affect the body and train the immune system. However, if you believe there are long term issues with vaccine use a good place to begin would be analyzing populations which experienced vaccine use and comparing them to those who have not. Oh hey, they did do that. It appears that the vaccinated generations died less from contagious disease kek.
Funny how you're fine with using a government source that (could) have a bias to claim your own argument but then have an issue with me doing the same thing moments later. A bit hypocritical, don't you think?
Regardless, a peer review process isn't by the individuals working on the study, processing the vaccine, or the lobbyists behind the vaccine industry, it's by scientists who have concerns just like you who will rip their trial study a new one trying to find flaws. If they do, then they have to address them or it's a no go for release.
Nah, user. I do it for the (you)s. If you, me, or someone else learns something, that's also cool, too.

Holy shit, why didn't your father complete the job when he stuck his finger through your soft spot when you were a baby? Wikipedia is biased as fuck.

Some people are allergic to vaccinations
If you get sick as a result of not getting vaccinated when you could have, you place those who couldn't be vaccinated at risk when you interact with them

Anti-vaxers aren't really opposed to vaccines—they're opposed to unsafe vaccines(vaccines with shitty ingredients to lower cost and maximize profits).

It was (((Big Pharma's))) dirty vaccines injuring too many people that made them start to question vaccines and what do you know (((Big Pharma))) through their control of Congress got a really good deal where they can sell anything they label a "vaccine"(doesn't matter if it's safe or effective) and not be held accountable for any injury caused and everyone is mandated to take their "vaccine" because they control Congress. Go shill somewhere else faggot.

Need any series of hacking jobs with full assurance and a high success, ranging from:
-Cracking/recovering passwords from computers, mobile & wireless devices, E-mail accounts and Social Media accounts(WhatsApp inclusive)
-Session hijacking. Session spoofing.
-Network traffic sniffing.
- Denial of Service attacks.
-Exploiting buffer overflow vulnerabilities.
- SQL injection.
-Surveillance and personal investigative services, Credit score upgrade and cleaning up of negative entry
[email protected]

Tam güvence ve yüksek bir başarı ile herhangi bir hackleme iş serisine ihtiyacınız var:
-Bilgisayarlardan, mobil ve kablosuz cihazlardan, E-posta hesaplarından ve Sosyal Medya hesaplarından şifreleri toplamak / kurtarmak (WhatsApp dahil)
-Oturum çalma. Oturum sahtekarlığı.
-Ağ trafiğini koklama.
- Hizmet Reddi saldırıları.
-Çıkarma arabelleği taşması güvenlik açıkları.
- SQL enjeksiyonu.
-Güvenlik ve kişisel soruşturma hizmetleri, Kredi notunun yükseltilmesi ve negatif girdilerin temizlenmesi

[email protected]

Attached: images (2).jpeg (519x591, 14.68K)

Definitely not a honeypot

Attached: Glow in the dark Deep State Agent meme.jpeg (224x224, 6.97K)

Alternatives to Google

qwant.com/
duckduckgo.com/
startpage.com/
ixquick.com
searx.me/
ecosia.org
search.yacy.net/
goodgopher.com/ (for news)
bing.com/

Alternatives for Twitter

gab.ai/
shitposters.club/
sealion.club/
freezepeach.xyz/
voat.co/
iscute.moe/
social.ufeff.club/

Alternatives for Youtube

d.tube/
bit.tube/
brighteon.com/ (aka real.video)
invidio.us/
pe.ertu.be
ugetube.com (gun tutorials)
hooktube.com/
liveleak.com/
bitchute.com/
minds.com/
streambotz.com/

Alternatives to Facebook

unseen.is/
signal.org/
freedom.social/
mastodon.social/
steemit.com/
joindiaspora.com/
snabbo.com/
medium.com/
spreely.com/

This. (((They))) actually want us to not find out whats in "vaccines." It seems like our God aka the (((government))) is doing something through "vaccines" and it wants to keep us in the dark. archive.is/GruFU

>Tech takes heat as the truth about (((vaccines))) gets reported more and more.
inb4 /leftycuck/ and his small nigger cock and love of small trannyfaggot cock

Normalfag meme. If you don't vaccinate you're retarded that's all there is to it.

I would be impartial but it's mostly whites that are anti-vax, which makes me suspicious

We could just close the borders. That's it. Herd immunity develops naturally over time without injecting poison and infertility drugs into people's veins.

...

It's because vaccines are mostly ineffective at actually preventing the disease. Their real effect is to create a plausible excuse to declare total medical ownership of all natural persons by a state.

(((valid))) and (((sourced))) indeed fellow heeb.

Must be the mercury talking.

Attached: 1551202884222.gif (381x178, 5.74K)

...

Autoimmune diseases is your body destroying itself because of an overzealous immune system.

When the virus enters a new host I think it mutates and this allows it to BTFO an unprepared immune system. So your antibodies dab on weak shit measles until it latches onto an unvaccinated victim, which mutates and starts balling on your white blood cells.
I didn't do any research btw.

In that case, I can't get vaccinated due to health concern issues.

Biased? Sure. But still factual. And it's sourced. There are links to everything where you can check and do your own research.

Keep in mind this is as opposed to FOX FUCKING NEWS.

reer news

pick one

50 syringes of well known and heavily researched content. Vaccines are fairly basic it's not some vial of mystery chemicals that protect you from a virus. All it is is a fake version of the virus so your body can produce antibodies before you're exposed. You autistic or something?

Humanity is hopeless…

If this keeps up, I might just move to Ethiopia.

Attached: tumblr_nbhpj8xMGy1qg6rkio1_1280.gif (1258x1314, 480.84K)

Law and Order satirized this specifically in their episode "Selfish".

And that was made 10 years ago.

lawandorder.fandom.com/wiki/Selfish

Isn't it interesting how the left takes this "responsibility to the group" stance regarding vaccination, completely disregarding the "my body, my choice" mantra in the case of those who decline vaccination, but violently oppose any attempt to apply similar logic to those groups which are almost entirely responsible for the continued spread of HIV in Western society - Blacks and gays.
If an "anti-vaxxer", they claim, ought to be forced to vaccinate for the protection of others against disease (taking steps to avoid people with compromised immune systems is not enough on their part, they say), then when the fuck should gays,
blacks and all other high hiv risk groups not be forced to be celibate, or banned from contact with members of low-risk groups for exactly the same reason?
The leftist will spew some sophistry or the other to explain why this is "different", but in reality we know the answer.
It isn't about "keeping people safe", and it never was.
And you can add blood donations by high risk groups to the list.
And vaccines are not 100% effective. Your inevitable reply that it's maximising protection that counts, is exactly why blacks and gays should be forced celibate under your own logic.

The vaccine "debate" is about stripping personal freedom and handing it to the govt using guilt and "what about the childrenz" as a cattle prod.

The best step a girl can take to avoid developing Aids is not "safer sex" - it is to avoid sex with black or bisexual men. This reduces her risk far better than insisting on condoms. Yet it is not taught in sex Ed, why not?
Again, because it was never about informed choice or safety.
>inb4 some retard posts "hetero" hiv rates from the CDC without checking the references which make it clear that said rate is for sex with a person known to be high risk OR ALREADY HIV+ .
AND for White men, if you limit sex to only White women in the low risk group (those who don't have swx with blacks, or knowling with bisexual men junkies, the infected etc) then your risk of catching the bug is so low that the cdc doesn't even include it in their charts. It is about the same annual risk as being struck by lightning.

Never use a condom if you are ready for children and are following the above. About 1/2 of live births are unplanned but the woman decides she wants to keep the baby after all. The Jews hate this fact, which is the real reason that they push "safe sex" on whites - some women just won't abort, so stop the sperm from ever reaching them.
Even if the relationship isn't "serious" yet, so long as you select girls who are up to your standard then there is a chance of getting your white family started ASAP while young and at peak reproductive health. Nothing brings a couple together like a first pregnancy at a young age.
The jew is terrified of this.
Don't worry about this being wrong or dishonest vav the girl, it is totally feminism approved because as they tell us "her body, her choice" which means she is responsible for her own contraception, so long as you do not lie about intending to use one - most women hate condoms anyway, and you will boost her self esteem by not making her feel that she is dirty or that you fear catching a disease.
Watch the Jews in here freak the fuck out now.

Vaxxers love to pretend that anti-vaxxers have control over the narrative when they are already censored and pro-vax stuff is frontlined.

"Trust us goyim we researched it."
No thanks Rabbi.