[extracted] New(?) 9-11 stuff

As I said, generally. Vaccines do appear have a unique status. Let's see if d2 can work out what that is.

Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk

Try saying "alexa" first. It might work better. Maybe "Siri?"

Let's see if you can work out how to not be such an annoying twat first. Then, maybe, I'll start answering your questions.

Even folks getting a PhD in Physical Education would learn that.

There are meds you can take before a meal to lessen the liklihood of heartburn.

Pepcid

Prilosec OTC

addendum: Many older adults take a dose of baby aspirin (or any low dose aspirin), which has been shown to reduce the risk of stroke.

Good example. Others include things like pre-surgical antibiotics, HIV Prep (pre-exposure prophylaxis), beta blockers to prevent migraines, aspirin for blood thinning, hell even prenatal vitamins and fluoride supplements.

Re the first, the *individual* knows they are likely to react poorly to acidic food. It is a reasonable thing to do. Ofc, the disease can be more effectively dealt with by changing the diet to a healthier pH balance rather than by supplementing it with a tablet. This is not comparable to a vaccine.

Re the second, that is debatable.

Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk

Billy, before we get on to even more of your completely ******ed world views, we haven't finished with the questions you avoided about the others yet. It's abundantly clear by now that if there's a completely imbecilic take to be had out there, you've fallen for it hook line and sinker, so let's tackle one at a time.

These are prescribed to *individuals* based on diagnoses for that *individual* who is likely to present symptoms or has history of relevant illness, i.e. reasonable preventative prescriptions based on *individual* diagnosis. There are no arbitrary prescriptions for random patients. That would be quite insane. Yet this is done routinely with vaccines.

Tell me a prescription for a patient who shows no sign of illness; is unlikely to become ill; and is not vulnerable to illness. The very notion of a patient who is perfectly well and healthy is a contradiction in terms. Yet with vaccines we see this is perfectly accepted. Encouraged even. Enforced! - in some places.

Ps. "Vulnerabilities" should be dealt with as a separate discussion, as that is rather a more nuanced issue. Let us stick with the oxymoronic healthy patients.

Pps. Deliberate obtuseness noted.

Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk

I was neither talking to you, nor do I care about what you think of this topic. I'm not responding to any points you were trying to make nor do I give the slightest sht what you think about any medical topic. You can pretend like I'm "being obtuse" to you all you want. The truth is, I simply do not care at all to even read what you are typing. Whether or not you approve of vaccines or not could not matter less to me. I simply don't care.

Now, if geezer or d2 were interested in the subject, I'd be happy to discuss it with them. I am done talking to intellectually dishonest, profoundly ignorant, ridiculously arrogant, and incredibly stupid people who refuse to defend any of their ideas, respond to any criticisms, nor present any evidence for any claims.

To sum up, I'm done with you. You are officially on my ignore list.

When going for a jab, do you think of yourself as a patient receiving an arbitrary prescription for a disease you may never have?

This is the unique position that vaccines occupy in medicine.

Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk

We're talking about medications to prevent or reduce the probablity of something adverse from happening. Which is what vaccines do as well. Nobody is saying they're exactly the same thing, but they certainly are comparable.

I'm not putting BillyBuckShot on ignore, but I think I'll refrain from responding to his posts any more for a while.

His bad faith posting isn't worth responding to any more for me.

d2_e4 will have to go it alone for a while, it appears.

Shalom!

Most of them are very close to the same use cases: pre-surgical antibiotics, for instance: bolstering the body's defenses prior to a potential exposure is the exact use case for vaccines. For me personally, I don't care if there isn't an exact analogue to vaccines (these are close enough for me) because vaccines occupying a unique position in the field of medicine is perfectly fine for me. It doesn't cause any concerns to me at all. It's perfectly consistent with the ethics of medicine (potential harm reduction is far greater than any potential risk). Informed consent is required either way, so ethically they are fine. It's not an argument that I find compelling, so I see no reason to even defend the position.

But, the use cases for many prophylactics is close enough to that of vaccines that I think the argument fails anyway. Just my thoughts, which I'm happy to share with you and couldn't care less what billy thinks about them.

But one size never fits all (with one notable exception). You dont go to a doctor and have him prescribe a drug arbitrarily (with one notable exception).

Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk

"Ethics of medicine"

"Potential harm reduction is far greater than any potential risk"

First, do no harm.

Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk

This ****ing simpleton lol. There are amoeba at the bottom of the ocean with a better understanding of the ethics of medicine than you.

By your "logic" the field of medicine would not exist, since any medicines or procedures with a nonzero chance of causing any harm, to anyone, ever, would not be ethically acceptable. So, all of them.

Looks like he's all yours, dude.

Gorgo and I are out.

I swear to god he just logs on here every day with the explicit goal of saying something even more stupid than anything he's said before. Have to admit, he is succeeding most days so far.

Whoosh! goes the sound of the point sailing majestically over your head.

Let us review the experts d2 has debunked in this thread:

Materials science and mechanics: NIST and several decorated masters of their field.

Astrophysics: Neil de Grasse Tyson PhD, well known celebrity astronomer.

Medicine: Hippocrates, most influential physician in the western world.

Good work, sir.

Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk

Let's not forget that you've also "debunked" the same experts, as well as literally pretty much every other scientist of the last several centuries. Looks like the good work here is mostly yours.

Anyway, I'm with Gorgo - you're way too stupid, ignorant, pig-headed, dishonest and obnoxious to even attempt to have a discussion with you on literally any topic. **** off.

I should receive some kind of award.

One final thing:

"Science"?

What's that?

Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk