Back to TheU.ca
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Banned Users List
Usergroups
RSS Feeds
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log inTheU.ca Forum Index - General Discussion - Flu shots - Reply to topic
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next
|
savage87 wrote: I know I would probably take my chances with smallpox lol.
Go for it Champ. You have fun with that. I'll take the shot. Let's compare who wins in say two weeks? Oh, and the reason his eyes are covered, by the way, is that he can't use them. Ever. again. It can cause blindness. Deafness. 35% mortality rate. 80% in children. |
|
Whoooa man there's no reason to post that kind of stuff. I can see the point you're making, but swine flu doesn't look anything like that. |
|
Lock
Russia's greatest love machine  Joined: 09 Jul 2009 Posts: 665 Location: The wrong place    votes: 6 View user's profile |
It's smallpox. Pedal's just trying to say it's not something it's reasonable to take lightly. |
|
Yeah, googling the image brought up some pretty disgusting images - especially of Children. If you want a good reason for Vaccines to exist, that is it. Feel free to convince yourself. |
|
Apocalypse
The Director  Joined: 22 Nov 2007 Posts: 619 Location: [CLASSIFIED]  votes: 4 View user's profile |
Code: )\ /|
.-/'-|_/ | __ __,-' ( / \/ .-'" "'-..__,-'"" -o.`-._ / '/ *--._../ _.-' | _.-' : .-/ \ )_ / \ _) / \( MY ELBOW ITCHES `. /-.___.---'( / \\ ( / \\ \( L\ \( L\ \\ \\ \\ I THINK IT'S SWINE FLU L\ L\ _________________ Man is the lowest-cost, 150-pound, nonlinear, all-purpose computer system which can be mass-produced by unskilled labor. |
|
Jimmy Big Ears
X-talk mobster  Joined: 13 Sep 2006 Posts: 3112 Location: St. Francis Xavier University  votes: 36 View user's profile |
pedal2000 wrote: savage87 wrote: I know I would probably take my chances with smallpox lol. Go for it Champ. You have fun with that. I'll take the shot. Let's compare who wins in say two weeks?
Oh, and the reason his eyes are covered, by the way, is that he can't use them. Ever. again. It can cause blindness. Deafness. 35% mortality rate. 80% in children. On smallpox, assuming survival the surface signs would fade some - he wouldn't look like that after a while - but there would be significant permanent scarring. They don't use the smallpox vaccine anymore though, as smallpox no longer exists except for in a couple of laboratories which are under extremely heavy security. _________________ " '... and I'm like, 'global warming? I thought this was a conference about chronic flatulence!' You see, they were talking about capping emissions, and..." http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1410 |
|
No. It's fine. It's a pretty simple reason to use it Jimmy, Savage has never, ever, seen someone with small pox before. Savage has never, ever, heard or really witnessed even a discussion on it before. At best he/she has heard a small brief couple of lines in some history course. So when Savage says "I know I would probably take my chances with smallpox lol." it shows how ignorant he/she is of the disease. And words? Words don't frighten. Telling someone a disease causes blindness, deafness, scarring, even a 30% mortality rate doesn't convince squat. Because they've never witnessed something as brutal and gruesome as that. And they never will likely. Thanks to Vaccine in this case. But he'd rather take his chances. |
|
Senther
Xtalk Drifter  Joined: 29 Jun 2006 Posts: 2230 Location: The Deadlights  votes: 42 View user's profile |
Calgary Flames: Special Treatment _________________ To avoid complications, she never kept the same address In conversation, she spoke just like a baroness |
|
pedal2000 wrote: Savage has never, ever, seen someone with small pox before. Savage has never, ever, heard or really witnessed even a discussion on it before. At best he/she has heard a small brief couple of lines in some history course. Nice, attacks based on information you made up. You've sunken to a new low pedal. 
*sigh* and he seemed like such a reasonable poster. |
|
Yeah? I just 'photo shopped' that picture clearly. Damn, I guess I am just a thievin' liar. Or do you mean the assumption that you've never seen someone with small pox before? I guess that would be safe since there hasn't been a case for over 30 years Thanks to Vaccine. |
|
Jimmy Big Ears
X-talk mobster Joined: 13 Sep 2006 Posts: 3112 Location: St. Francis Xavier University votes: 36 View user's profile |
pedal2000 wrote: No. It's fine. It's a pretty simple reason to use it Jimmy, Savage has never, ever, seen someone with small pox before. Savage has never, ever, heard or really witnessed even a discussion on it before. At best he/she has heard a small brief couple of lines in some history course.
As long as you know where the line is. I think that picture is right about at the limit, which is why I said you're heading toward the line. As someone who's seen a few very gruesome pictures that vaporize that one on a level of graphicness I hope you wouldn't post something worse than that. That one was ugly enough.
So when Savage says "I know I would probably take my chances with smallpox lol." it shows how ignorant he/she is of the disease. And words? Words don't frighten. Telling someone a disease causes blindness, deafness, scarring, even a 30% mortality rate doesn't convince squat. Because they've never witnessed something as brutal and gruesome as that. And they never will likely. Thanks to Vaccine in this case. But he'd rather take his chances. I think savage meant your assumption that he only read a couple lines in a history book and never saw a discussion before. You mentioned three or four things. _________________ " '... and I'm like, 'global warming? I thought this was a conference about chronic flatulence!' You see, they were talking about capping emissions, and..." http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1410 |
|
Lock
Russia's greatest love machine Joined: 09 Jul 2009 Posts: 665 Location: The wrong place votes: 6 View user's profile |
Why should that picture be the limit? I don't think that sheltering people from "gruesome" things makes them any better or safer or happier. |
|
Because the point it makes is invalid. Swine flu doesn't give you boils, it's not nearly as ugly. I may as well show a picture of a polio victim and use it to convince you to wear a seatbelt. |
|
aspie jew stereotype wrote: Because the point it makes is invalid. Swine flu doesn't give you boils, it's not nearly as ugly.
So therefore we should be openly exposed to swineflu because it's not as bad as smallpox, regardless that there is an easy way avoid it? Btw, I got the shot, and I can still walk properly. If I had swineflu right now, however, I wouldn't be walking very properly. |
|
aspie jew stereotype wrote: Because the point it makes is invalid. Swine flu doesn't give you boils, it's not nearly as ugly. I may as well show a picture of a polio victim and use it to convince you to wear a seatbelt.
That's actually a very good point. Smallpox is not a valid comparison to an influenza strain with a (crudely estimated by the CDC) death rate of well under 1%. Smallpox is an example of an area where vaccines have moved the field forward, but with the amount that medicine has advanced since smallpox was eradicated almost 60 years ago, it's not a good starting comparison. |
|
Lock
Russia's greatest love machine Joined: 09 Jul 2009 Posts: 665 Location: The wrong place votes: 6 View user's profile |
I think that picture was just a response to savage87 bringing up smallpox. I don't think pedal was trying to make a direct comparison, but I could be wrong. |
|
Jimmy Big Ears
X-talk mobster Joined: 13 Sep 2006 Posts: 3112 Location: St. Francis Xavier University votes: 36 View user's profile |
Lock wrote: Why should that picture be the limit? I don't think that sheltering people from "gruesome" things makes them any better or safer or happier. Because there is a limit to the stuff one should be able to shove in people's faces to make a point. It's vital in some scenarios up to a point but going too far just lets people indulge in the shock tactic of "I'm going to show you the most gruesome image possible" which is generally used not to enlighten but to provoke a desired reaction such as riling people up. People who use shock tactics usually justify them by saying they're 'just showing people reality' when they're either exercising their anger ('Look at this! You still think so huh? Huh?) riling people up or in some cases just being sickos by enjoying making other people sick to their stomachs.
The other point is that frankly there is a limit to what is right to push in people's faces. If someone posted a particularly violent photograph I remember I'd advocate kicking their ass to the curbside. I think people should know about the Holocaust for example and I think posting some things (i.e. all the skeletal malnourished people) but I wouldn't advocate posting graphic images of slaughter taking place. People do have a certain right not to have things pushed at them so there is a limit to what people ought to post. I think pedal's picture was just about at the limit. _________________ " '... and I'm like, 'global warming? I thought this was a conference about chronic flatulence!' You see, they were talking about capping emissions, and..." http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1410 |
|
Lock
Russia's greatest love machine Joined: 09 Jul 2009 Posts: 665 Location: The wrong place votes: 6 View user's profile |
If you say so. That's more or less the opposite of how I see things. |
|
Senther
Xtalk Drifter Joined: 29 Jun 2006 Posts: 2230 Location: The Deadlights votes: 42 View user's profile |
PEDAL uses CHEMO! It's super effective! _________________ To avoid complications, she never kept the same address In conversation, she spoke just like a baroness |
|
Jimmy Big Ears wrote: but going too far just lets people indulge in the shock tactic of "I'm going to show you the most gruesome image possible"
Google it. Tell me I picked the most gruesome image possible. |
TheU.ca Forum Index - General Discussion - Flu shots - Reply to topic
