Gillard cabinet leak damages her rep.

[Sappho]

There never is any context given to a leak, beyond the leak itself. Laurie Oakes is a most reputable political commentator who is not about to loose all that kudos he has gained over the decades by disclosing a bogus leak.

[Ned Kelly]

Laurie Oakes is a journalist.

[boxy]

She's been having some speech therapy, I expect, to knock the edge off the Australian Drawl, I expect.

It's all so terribly artificial. We moderns care more about the surface of the person than we do about the person themselves. We care more about power politicking and catch cries than we do about ideologies.

I think we shall go down as being the 'Shallow Era'.

Perhaps we are individualistic, rather than shallow? Running with an ideological herd is passé. I think the problem is not with the generation, but rather with information overload, the salesmanship of pseudo-science and over commercialisation of the mainstream media. There are big issues out there, that people potentially care very deeply about, however they are bombarded with 'alternative views' these days, and are expected (mainly by themselves) to evaluate the evidence themselves, even if thoroughly unqualified to do so. We are in an era where trained experts are no more trusted than loudmouth vested interests (either commercial or ideological) with attractive alternatives, who are given equal air time from the media, which is driven by market forces, and knows that debate sells better, and for longer, than stating facts.

The "debate" about vaccination is a case in point. Science and stats shows that blanket vaccination clearly delivers the greatest good for the greatest number by a long margin. Yet the bullshite artists still got airtime for entertainment's sake.

[Mattus]

. Science and stats shows that blanket vaccination clearly delivers the greatest good for the greatest number by a long margin.

Rubbish.

[IQSRLOW]

. Science and stats shows that blanket vaccination clearly delivers the greatest good for the greatest number by a long margin.

Rubbish.

Citation?

[Mattus]

The only cases of polio in Australia in th last 15 years have been caused by the vaccine itself.

[boxy]

Really? So blanket vaccinations for say, whooping cough (unless there is a specific reason not to vaccinate in individual cases) doesn't provide a much lower mortality rate than not vaccinating?

The only cases of polio in Australia in th last 15 years have been caused by the vaccine itself.

Only because of the high vaccination rates for the decades preceding it.

[Mattus]

Really? So blanket vaccinations for say, whooping cough (unless there is a specific reason not to vaccinate in individual cases) doesn't provide a much lower mortality rate than not vaccinating?

Whooping cough vaccine is fine.

The only cases of polio in Australia in th last 15 years have been caused by the vaccine itself.

Only because of the high vaccination rates for the decades preceding it.

Nevertheless, the public today are at a much higher risk from the vaccine itself, than the disease it's trying to prevent. The concern over the polio vaccine is completely legitimate, and not to be dismissed a 'bullshite artists for entertainment sake".

[boxy]

My point is that this type of thing isn't something that should be decided on ACA, though. I'm not qualified to decide, and even if I was, I don't have the time to evaluate the data on this issue (and every other issue that is brought up). I don't/cant know how likely polio (or any other disease) is to come back if we back off vaccinating for it...

[Mattus]

I do agree. The "fair and balanced" often results in giving airtime to whackjobs just because the disagree with something. However it just gets my back up when people start using "science and stats" to support their position when, by your own admission, you haven't reviewed the science or the stats of some vaccines.