Zika Virus

fool

fool

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
elohiym said:
It really isn't.
Click to expand...

Sure it is, if a woman has it she can't reproduce. If a man has it he can't reproduce because he'll give it to his partner when he does the reproducing with her even if she didn't have it before.

One Mosquito bite knocks you out of the gene pool forever!

Game over man, game over.
 
fool

fool

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
elohiym said:
No, it's being overblown. That disease has been around for a long time and suddenly it's causing microcephaly? Let's see more evidence before we jump to conclusions.
Click to expand...

We must destroy the mosquitos now.
 
1PeaceMaker

1PeaceMaker

New member
We already have risks we have to run getting pregnant all the time. Down's syndrome, other birth defects, and we accept those risks.

How high does the risk have to be before you would refuse to conceive a child?
 
serpentdove

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
^
spray_emoticon_by_juliatoffy-d79if3a.gif
*Fumigating thread* (Heb 13:4).

See:

PeaceMakingPolygamist
 
Last edited:
elohiym

elohiym

Well-known member
fool said:
Sure it is, if a woman has it she can't reproduce. If a man has it he can't reproduce because he'll give it to his partner when he does the reproducing with her even if she didn't have it before.

One Mosquito bite knocks you out of the gene pool forever!

Game over man, game over.
Click to expand...

You need to use smilies. I have no idea if you are serious or not. Are you joking with me? I'm okay with that, just want to know.
 
elohiym

elohiym

Well-known member
Jose Fly said:
Doubt it.
Click to expand...

Thimerosal exposure and birth defects

In addition, it was observed that influenza vaccine (at a time when it was preserved with Thimerosal) exposure was a risk factor for cleft palate (hospital standardized relative risk = 7.1), microcephaly (hospital standardized relative risk = 2.6), and pyloric stenosis (hospital standardized relative risk = 2.0) [35].​

I'm not assuming you dispute that.

What I want to know is if you believe that, why would you doubt the vaccine given just prior to these microcephaly cases were discovered didn't contribute to the rise in incidence of microcephaly?

It would be negligent to not first rule out the Thimersol.
 
elohiym

elohiym

Well-known member
Finding the virus in those babies doesn't necessarily suggest a meaningful correlation. They need to prove the virus causes microcephaly via Koch's Postulates.
 
fool

fool

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
elohiym said:
You need to use smilies. I have no idea if you are serious or not. Are you joking with me? I'm okay with that, just want to know.
Click to expand...

Totally serious.
I'm not an expert but from what I heard on the radio if you get it then you got it and your kids are not gonna make it.
AND
If a mosquito gets it then they have it and all their kids have it too.

So a human that has it is a genetic dead end, and is a resevoir for it his whole life, infecting whatever mosquitos bite him. And the mosquitos are carriers for the rest of time. So even if you kept the mosquitos and the people apart it would always be waiting there.

How do you get rid of something like that?
It's worse than AIDS and mosquito born.
 
Jose Fly

Jose Fly

New member
elohiym said:
What I want to know is if you believe that, why would you doubt the vaccine given just prior to these microcephaly cases were discovered didn't contribute to the rise in incidence of microcephaly?

It would be negligent to not first rule out the Thimersol.
Click to expand...

Except Thimerosal has been at various levels of use since the 1930's, and I haven't seen any evidence than an increase in its use correlates with an increase in microcephaly, or that decreases in its use (e.g., in the US since 2001, which is why your citation says "at a time when it was preserved with Thimerosal"...note the use of past tense, and the fact that the paper they cite for this is from 1977) correlates with decreases in microcephaly (EDIT: and I mean to the point where it would account for the levels of microcephaly we're seeing today).

But either way, as always more data and research will help us figure this out.
 
1PeaceMaker

1PeaceMaker

New member
fool said:
Totally serious.
I'm not an expert but from what I heard on the radio if you get it then you got it and your kids are not gonna make it.
AND
If a mosquito gets it then they have it and all their kids have it too.

So a human that has it is a genetic dead end, and is a resevoir for it his whole life, infecting whatever mosquitos bite him. And the mosquitos are carriers for the rest of time. So even if you kept the mosquitos and the people apart it would always be waiting there.

How do you get rid of something like that?
It's worse than AIDS and mosquito born.
Click to expand...

You are talking like the virus causes 100% microcephaly in pregnant mothers.
 
elohiym

elohiym

Well-known member
fool said:
Totally serious.
I'm not an expert but from what I heard on the radio if you get it then you got it and your kids are not gonna make it.
AND
If a mosquito gets it then they have it and all their kids have it too.
Click to expand...

There is no evidence for that. Don't worry too much.

fool said:
How do you get rid of something like that?
It's worse than AIDS and mosquito born.
Click to expand...

The Zika virus isn't new, right? It has a history already and was considered harmless until the hysteria started.

Finding Zika virus in those children doesn't necessarily prove a meaningful correlation.
 
1PeaceMaker

1PeaceMaker

New member
3 million babies are born in Brazil every year.

We don't have that many kids getting microcephaly to be worried about the end of the world or using birth control to prevent it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top