[mikema63]

Thalidomide technically wasn't poisonous, it was an enantiomer produced in a racemic mixture with the drug that caused the problems.

There is perfectly sufficient evidence on herd immunity and the horrors of the diseases they prevent. Even if you pretend that they do cause all the problems people claim the rates people claim for those issues are still far far less than the ravages of these reemerging diseases.

Vaccines are safe and effective and for all your concern about the precious civil rights of people to not get vaccinated you immediately suggest an alternative which restricts peoples ability to travel.

[ness31]

Thalidomide technically wasn't poisonous, it was an enantiomer produced in a racemic mixture with the drug that caused the problems.

There is perfectly sufficient evidence on herd immunity and the horrors of the diseases they prevent. Even if you pretend that they do cause all the problems people claim the rates people claim for those issues are still far far less than the ravages of these reemerging diseases.

Vaccines are safe and effective and for all your concern about the precious civil rights of people to not get vaccinated you immediately suggest an alternative which restricts peoples ability to travel.

Mentioning thalidomide was a salient reminder that sometimes approved drugs don’t turn out to be safe.

And yes, I’d choose impinging on travelers rights before I decided to put an indelible fingerprint on a generation of children, yes.

[mikema63]

The indelible fingerprint of disease immunity. Heaven forbid.

[ness31]

I don’t believe that the policy is malevolent, in fact it was quite the opposite.

The idea was for the ‘true believers’ to pschologically carry and bring under a unified umbrella those who didn’t really understand or care about vaccines. As noble as that idea is, it’s misguided and paternalistic.

But keep laughing. You and those like you. Keep the masses ignorant.

[Drlee]

Therefore I will repeat myself again. There has not been sufficient evidence presented to justify the coercion of parents vaccinating their children.

Garbage. There is not a single government in the WORLD that does not seek near universal vaccine coverage for some diseases. Virtually all of them fund the vaccinations. Especially for the uninsured and poor.

Here is what the WHO GAVI says:

Vaccines are one of the most successful and cost-effective health investments in history

Vaccination currently saves between 2 and 3 million lives every year.1 Vaccines as public health tools – eradicating smallpox, containing polio to just three endemic countries and greatly reducing many other diseases – have an indisputable track record.

The impact of vaccines goes far beyond saving lives and improving health. Vaccination is in every sense an investment, with wider benefits that accrue across a lifetime.

Stop the third world immigrants coming and going from their homelands and bringing their diseases back with them. Isolate travelers who could import said diseases.

You really are ignorant of why we vaccinate. You have some silly notion that all of these diseases come from overseas. The most deadly influenza epidemic in history started in the US.

But don’t tar everyone in a resident population (which happen to be school kids from your own admission) with the same large pharmaceutical brush.

Nonsensical rhetoric. Foolish statement. You clearly have no clue how infectious diseases are passed and who suffers most. Until you are willing to educate yourself on the subject there is little reason to consider your opinions as crackpot ideas that they are.

[ness31]

We are talking about vaccine schedules and why babies need hepatitis vaccines and you’re harping in about influenza and small small pox. It’s like you deliberately skew the argument.

I’m comfortable with the way I have comported myself in this thread sir. It is you who comes off smug and arrogant. And don’t dress up your arrogance as passion either - it’s zealotry pure and simple.

[Godstud]

Thalidomide anyone?

Drug, not immunization. Strawman.

Also, they still use it, in case you were wondering... Today, thalidomide is used mainly as a treatment of certain cancers (multiple myeloma) and of a complication of leprosy.

People won't think vaccines are more important if people have to pay for it, out of pocket. We pay taxes so that all can benefit. I don't see why you think it should be personal choice when it's a selfish choice that would put many people at risk if we relied on uninformed, ignorant people, with not medical background, to choose the best way to immunize themselves from dangerous diseases.

It's not arrogance or smugness, but called frustration at dealing someone who claims ignorance and then won't listen when people politely inform him.

[ness31]

Frustration? Rubbish, you’d actually have to have some form of empathy to know anything about frustration. Many of the responses in this thread are basic, rudimentary and without nuance.

I mention thalidomide and you rattle off other uses for it. You assume I know nothing else about thalidomide and then accuse me of using a straw man argument. My point, that sometimes pharmaceutical companies can get it wrong is scuppered as a mere aberration. You don’t seem to even entertain the notion that it’s prudent to exercise caution.

Prosthetic Conscience described my wanting to compare the amount of current gun deaths to those that might occur if vaccines were cost reflective as “a red herring” when it actually goes to the core of how far personal liberties could and should be infringed upon.

I’m not an idiot. I know what I’ve written. Ganging up on someone who has a different way of thinking demonstrates the maturity and nous of your average teenage bully.

[Godstud]

Thalidomide was a drug, and not a vaccine. Unrelated.

You assumption about empathy is an asshole comment. We'd not CARE about your ignorance(or about vaccinating people at all), if we didn't have empathy.

Pharmaceutical companies have not gotten vaccines wrong, so your assumption needs a source to support your claim. I take it you'll now post it?

The medical science behind vaccines is conclusive. You don't have to agree with facts for them to be real.

[ness31]

Thalidomide was a drug, and not a vaccine. Unrelated.

The wisdom behind both products come from the same source. Now you’re being rude and obstinate.

[Godstud]

That's false, and you know it.

Thalidomide was a different situation from modern vaccines, and you know it. It is a logical fallacy to compare a mistake with decades of medical knowledge. We all know medical science isn't infallible. Is that the point you're trying to make?

[Drlee]

We are talking about vaccine schedules and why babies need hepatitis vaccines and you’re harping in about influenza and small small pox. It’s like you deliberately skew the argument.

Nonsense. In fact I spoke in great detail about Measles. I also posted references to the WHO but you doggedly refuse to acknowledge either.

I’m comfortable with the way I have comported myself in this thread sir.

You shouldn't be. You are dogged and obstinately reiterating an idea you have yet to justify with a single fact. Your arguments are the hypothetical against the scientific. You ignore the facts and the experts in service to some vague notion and political theory.

It is you who comes off smug and arrogant. And don’t dress up your arrogance as passion either - it’s zealotry pure and simple.

I really think you are not paying attention. I will let someone else tell you why I am passionate about this.

Tell me though. What is the difference between passion and zealotry?

One more quick question. Would you find my comments unjustified if they came from an epidemiologist?

[ness31]

That's false, and you know it.

Thalidomide was a different situation from modern vaccines, and you know it. It is a logical fallacy to compare a mistake with decades of medical knowledge. We all know medical science isn't infallible. Is that the point you're trying to make?

If medical science, with its research and data isn’t infallible then where is the moral argument for compulsion? Now let me save you the bother of having to reply -

“Because vaccines have been proven to work and have saved millions of lives since their introduction. These are the facts.”

Is that about right?

I guess everyone is comfortable with what long term use of vaccines will be, the science is settled!

But things have changed a lot since they were sniffing small pox scabs up their noses to what’s being injected now. I’d call it a work in progress.

I’m sure we will never see a day when our T lymphocytes stop reacting to vaccines as we expect them too. That could never happen! It’s unheard of! Why would it happen? Stop being a crackpot ness31

Nonsense. In fact I spoke in great detail about Measles. I also posted references to the WHO but you doggedly refuse to acknowledge either.

Yes you and others have spoken at great length about measles, as though it were the only vaccine on the schedule. But you’ve not explained why a baby needs a hepatitis vaccination.

You shouldn't be. You are dogged and obstinately reiterating an idea you have yet to justify with a single fact. Your arguments are the hypothetical against the scientific. You ignore the facts and the experts in service to some vague notion and political theory.

Newsflash bruvs, vaccines themselves started in the realm of the hypothetical. Why you insist on stifling debate is anyone’s guess.

Tell me though. What is the difference between passion and zealotry?

Passion and it’s motivations lay somewhere completely different to those of zealotry. I can be passionate about vaccines, only a zealot will seek to enforce them on those not willing.

One more quick question. Would you find my comments unjustified if they came from an epidemiologist?

I have no issue with experts providing advice in their field. But ultimately it is up to each individual to gather what they have learned from a wide range of sources and come to their own conclusions.

[Bulaba Khan Jones]

Arguing about the efficacy of vaccines, or being so ignorant on the subject of medicine and basic health that one thinks the function and results of vaccination is a murky field filled with questions and doubts is the same as someone stubborn and ignorant insisting that the use of soap cannot be proven to an absolute certainty to improve hygiene and prevent disease.

You refuse to read or learn about medicine/health/vaccines, and then continue to insist the results of vaccines are doubtful. As this thread continues to show, it just doesn't really work to discuss/debate a topic when someone has admitted they don't understand the topic in question, has no intention to learn how it works, but insists they know certain facts, or that their own doubts about the subject (fueled by their admitted lack of knowledge and ignorance about what's being discussed) can't be criticized and contradicted by reality/research/facts/information or else they view it as a personal insult.

[Drlee]

only a zealot will seek to enforce them on those not willing.

You are not willing to make a cogent argument. You are ignoring cogent arguments from others and attempting to label them away.

I have wasted enough time with you. When you are ready to make an argument, let me know. I am glad I did not make this remark. It is beyond stupid:

If medical science, with its research and data isn’t infallible then where is the moral argument for compulsion?

Just stupid.

[ness31]

That’s your final word? Then let the record stand.

[Godstud]

The jury on vaccines is in. They're safe. You can choose to accept that, and the mountains of evidence supporting this conclusion, or you can choose to believe pseudo-science from philosophy majors, and the ilk of David Avacado Wolfe.

Paying for something out of pocket does not make it more valued, than if you pay with your taxes.

[Bulaba Khan Jones]

Two centuries of vaccine data does stand, so yes, the record does stand.

[ness31]

Inoculations from the late 1700s differ greatly to what we’ve concocted today.

I’m not sure anyone really understands the impact of vaccines on antigen drifting and variation or what role vaccines play in selection pressure.

But you all seem pretty comfy with it.

*edit* Just reading up on Hepatits B vaccine and now I know why babies get that injected into them hours after they’re born. Because apparently the majority of mothers out there are trailer trash asymptomatic carriers and will pass it on to their child. Charming. Some more moralising from the higher than mighty mandatory vaccinators toward the great unwashed..

[Bulaba Khan Jones]

God forbid someone (and their children) lose their precious personal liberty to potentially endanger the lives of people around them by refusing to be vaccinated because of no reason in particular.

Vaccinations are a matter of public health, medical hygiene, and disease prevention. We aren't the ones moralizing by insisting it's coercion and wrong to require people to vaccinate because it somehow violates a person's right to be a potential spreader of now-rare (due to global vaccination efforts) and deadly diseases.

As an aside, you've got to stop viewing criticism and comments about your posts/opinions as personal attacks. You're taking every contrary statement, regardless of how coddling and neutral it's worded, as a personal affront.