Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,794
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 167:
Line 167: + +
→"Soreness" Admission: reply
The statement by the CDC that the injection commonly causes soreness at the injection site is meaningless, and almost comical. Unless there is a good reason for including such an obviously meaningless statement, let's remove it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:38, 29 August 2008 (EDT)
The statement by the CDC that the injection commonly causes soreness at the injection site is meaningless, and almost comical. Unless there is a good reason for including such an obviously meaningless statement, let's remove it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:38, 29 August 2008 (EDT)
: I felt that the CDC statement validated and quantified the anecdotal evidence from the news story - it showed that it was not just a few silly high school girls saying "ooohhhh, that hurt!" to a newspaper reporter, but rather that it was a widespread and well-documented reaction to the vaccine. I'm not sure I understand your objection? At first I thought you thought the whole paragraph was not worthy of inclusion (which I could see both sides of), but since you've just removed the CDC part, I realize I don't understand your objection. How is it meaningless? Please understand - I'm not criticizing your opinion - just trying to understand it. I can be a bit ditsy at times - blonde, actually! - so sometimes I don't get the obvious unless it's spelled out to me. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 22:19, 30 August 2008 (EDT)
: I felt that the CDC statement validated and quantified the anecdotal evidence from the news story - it showed that it was not just a few silly high school girls saying "ooohhhh, that hurt!" to a newspaper reporter, but rather that it was a widespread and well-documented reaction to the vaccine. I'm not sure I understand your objection? At first I thought you thought the whole paragraph was not worthy of inclusion (which I could see both sides of), but since you've just removed the CDC part, I realize I don't understand your objection. How is it meaningless? Please understand - I'm not criticizing your opinion - just trying to understand it. I can be a bit ditsy at times - blonde, actually! - so sometimes I don't get the obvious unless it's spelled out to me. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 22:19, 30 August 2008 (EDT)
:: Most injections cause soreness at the injection site, so the CDC statement obscures the dangers of this particular vaccine by making an obvious and meaningless statement. It would be as though an entry on a breed of dangerous pitbulls admitted only the obvious truth that "the most common encounter with this breed of pitbull is a harmless one!"--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:23, 30 August 2008 (EDT)
== References ==
== References ==
<references/>
<references/>