-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
The phony "public-health crisis" of gun violence
- Thread starter mikeyp
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2009
- Messages
- 938
- Likes
- 381
Public health, via the medical profession, is the instrument TPTB are using to attack and crack down on individual liberties across the board in the name of the greater good.
Last edited:
tuna
NES Member
Neither were actual facts.
But seriously water to EPA standard is estimated to kill more people per 100k than guns. Vinyl Chloride alone is getting there. But I guess miscarriages, birth defects, and terminal illness aren't a sexy story.
If it takes longer than paint drying to build the story, the MSM does not have the patience for it. Also, tracking such casualties of various substances would take true journalism, which was pronounced dead long ago. Add to the mix that such a story doesn't serve to subordinate conservatives and there's one more reason for the crickets.
Sad...
Can we make it illegal to refer to anything as a public health issue if it doesn't involve a process occurring inside someone's body or a communicable disease? This stuff is a bunch of horse shit.
-Mike
-Mike
most of medical profession believes they know better than you. it's disgusting. there are some respectable people in the medical profession, but most of them are afraid to speak out in favor of freedoms for fear of peer backlash.
- - - Updated - - -
agreed. part of the problem is that most major public health issues have been solved, so the public health field needs to find new "crises" to justify their existence.
- - - Updated - - -
agreed. part of the problem is that most major public health issues have been solved, so the public health field needs to find new "crises" to justify their existence.
EMTDAD
NES Member
you missed the complete point of the story... what you quoted was an intro to how the author was lead to the rest of the article.. SHOOTING DOWN the entire concept that gun violence is a "public health crisis"...
amm5061
NES Member
How about they ****ing work on curing Zika and other diseases and actually producing a cure for the various cancers we die from at a much higher rate than "gun violence?" There's plenty of shit to cure out there. How about going back to trying to wipe out Mumps and Measles? Clearly they're doing real well with those.
![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
Garys
NES Member
The Public Health field went off the rails over 30 years ago when they refused to classify AIDS/HIV as a public health issue. They then further compounded the problem by making EVERY other thing in the world a public health crisis. Car seats, bike helmets, cigarettes, sugar, booze, obesity, salt, guns & seat belts. None of which are contagious, which used to be the classic definition of public health.
They've since failed to identify the re emergence of TB as a public health crisis. Along with the uninhibited influx of illegal immigrants coming in from parts of the world where vaccinations are unknown. Why do you think that all of a sudden there is a rise in childhood diseases that had become very rare in this country?
Illegal immigration itself is a public health crisis, based not just on the diseases brought in, but the violence endemic among illegal aliens.
They've since failed to identify the re emergence of TB as a public health crisis. Along with the uninhibited influx of illegal immigrants coming in from parts of the world where vaccinations are unknown. Why do you think that all of a sudden there is a rise in childhood diseases that had become very rare in this country?
Illegal immigration itself is a public health crisis, based not just on the diseases brought in, but the violence endemic among illegal aliens.
That's the only public health crisis that we should be worrying about. Especially when they walk in the door of the ER and get treatment and never pay, leaving the rest of us with the tab.
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2009
- Messages
- 938
- Likes
- 381
For one thing any vaccine conferred immunity is temporary, if any at all. We see outbreaks worldwide in near fully vaccinated communities. Their efficacy should be called into question. Look at the recent Mumps cases on college campuses, close to 100% fully vaccinated rate of I'm not mistaken.
Last edited:
![[laugh2]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/014.gif "Laugh at above [laugh2]")
MachineHead
NES Member
^^THIS!
For people who claim to know what they're talking about, guns are the subject that few actually know about but grossly misrepresent in understanding. Those that know about guns aren't Lefty agenda pushers.
CRSIII
NES Member
Kills more people than guns.
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2009
- Messages
- 938
- Likes
- 381
Ha, yep, by many miles
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2009
- Messages
- 938
- Likes
- 381
No, but you can recognize that's its being used across the board to condition people to accept giving up their individual rights in the name of the collective.
Last edited:
MaverickNH
NES Member
Despite all the noise made by the gun-haters about NRA-backed bans on CDC funding for Firearms Research, there is more Gun Control funding of academic Anti-gun reasearch today than the Government has ever or will fund. Cash from Bloomberg and Soros flows through the legitimizing "laundry" of Joyce Foundation and other "neutral" fronts into anti-gun academic pockets. These Centers for Violence Research couldn't survive on the usual academic funding for medical research, they need the Sugar Daddy money to keep their doors open.
the fundamental problem with the "public health" risk assessments involving firearms is they always lump together death and injury statistics caused by prohibited persons and legally owned firearms. It would be like doing a risk assessment of opioids and adding together the over-doses of junkies that illegally obtained the drugs and medically supervised applications, which you could then conclude that their misuse should prevent their legitimate applications? That would be stupid--just like telling legal gun owners they need to give up their guns because prohibited persons cause "gun crime"
Garys
NES Member
The fundamental problem with public health risk assessments involving firearms is that they draw the conclusion and then tailor the "data" to support their pre determined position. It's not science, it's advocacy and politics.
Medical people are all gung-ho on vaccines/medications saying that the side effects are worth the benefits they provide. Given the numbers stated for firearms preventing confrontations and keeping .gov in check, one might say that 30k deaths per year are a side effect of the medicine called firearms. Look at the stats on defensive uses and Bill Whittle's videos on out of control .gov murdering it's own citizens and my opinion is that 30k is ok.
Last edited by a moderator:
There is no ban on the CDC doing research into deaths or violence committed with firearms; there is a ban on the CDC advocating for gun control. There was a study done back in 2013-ish in the wake of Sandy Hook, but it wasn't extensively reported on in the popular media because the results didn't fit the anti gun agenda.
Similar threads
