I Don’t Vaccinate My Child Because It’s My Right To Decide.. - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political and non-political satire; all those terribly biased analogies live here.
#14638786
I just want the kids in my family protected, but I have a sense that non-vaccinating parents will squawk merry hell if they think the ensuing blow-back might cause them any inconvenience wot-so-bloody ever.
#14638797
I disqualify myself from this thread. I have "insider information".

But:

fetuses will be grown in laboratories and kept in Borg-style maturation chambers and then released when they are approximately 18-20 years of age, relatively speaking.


Releasing 19-20 year olds before they are about 35 (for purposes other than temporarily having sex with them) is criminal negligence.
#14638858
This topic is a big deal in Australia. We have a "no jab, no play policy" and all tax benefits are cut to the family.

Personally, I strongly oppose government coercion towards parents who refuse to vaccinate their children. It doesn't sit right with me.
I don't know what epidemiologists have to say about the threat to herd immunity or if there even is a credible one...

For the record, I would have my children vaccinated.

p.s when I was getting vaccinated in primary school I recall a smallish girl, (I say smallish because she was much shorter than the average height in the class) and after she had received her jab she was very unwell and her lips turned blue.
#14638862
and after she had received her jab she was very unwell and her lips turned blue.
Sounds like shock. She was probably scared shitless and was reacting to the needle and not what was in it. There are side-effects, but they are far rarer than people make them out to be, and rarely fatal.

Herd immunity or not, there are people who are too young to take vaccines, or who have immune systems that won't allow it. That alone means that vaccinating your child could protect another one.

It's a real thing.
Community Immunity ("Herd Immunity")
Vaccines can prevent outbreaks of disease and save lives.
http://www.vaccines.gov/basics/protection/
#14638864
It was probably shock as GS says. I used to have a near-mortal fear of injections, and the amount of anxiety and panic I felt usually made my face look extremely pale. The doctors and nurses would typically comment on that, but it wasn't because of the shots themselves, but rather my reaction.
#14638906
Look at all the nanny-state advocates in this thread. Now you advocate protecting children from preventable diseases despite their parents' willful ignorance, tomorrow you'll be telling me I cannot give a toddler an Uzi to play with or mix some opium into her soft drink to help her sleep through Game of Thrones. It's bad enough that I cannot beat kids with bondage gear whenever they mis-behave now I have to ignore prominent health warnings about diabetes and cancer.

I miss the glorious days when I was isolated and alone with no emergency phone number, nutritional information or employment protections. It's all gone to the dogs since then.
#14639313
Godstud wrote:It is NOT the right of every parent to put their child at risk of catching a fully preventable disease, that can kill or cripple the child.

It is every parent's right to take their kids out for a car drive, which can kill or cripple the child. Most car drives are not really necessary and so these deaths/injuries are also preventable.

Stormsmith wrote:I'm cool with you not vaccinating your kids, providing you home school and keep them out of recreation centre/public baths, restaurants, - you know, all publicly shared spaces.

Why would that be necessary (assuming for a moment that this could be implemented)? They will only infect other people who are not vaccinated. As long as you and I and our kids are vaccinated we have nothing to worry about.
#14639317
Why would that be necessary (assuming for a moment that this could be implemented)? They will only infect other people who are not vaccinated. As long as you and I and our kids are vaccinated we have nothing to worry about.


Because there are any number of children who, for medical reasons, are unable to take the vaccine. Many of these children are more likely to be severely ill from these diseases because of compromised immune systems. They rely on the immunity of others to prevent the spread of diseases that might kill them.

There are other issues as well. Many of them. If you want me to go into antibiotic resistance, adaptation and such I am happy to. Needless to say that this is one subject in which the selfish (and that is the "you and I" you are talking about, can not be allowed to indulge their idiotic arrogance.
#14639334
The more carriers of a disease the more opportunities for it to mutate and become more contagious or develop immunity to current vaccines. I'm not sure if this is what adaptation means but given how much concern medical organisations have for new versions of the flu that have high fatality but low levels of contagion it is very concerning.

Do you remember bird flu or swine flu? They got a lot of attention despite killing almost no one whilst the regular old flu kills thousands every year. The fear is that a new Spanish flu, which was simultaneously highly contagious and highly fatal, will develop and go global.
#14639337
Drlee wrote:Because there are any number of children who, for medical reasons, are unable to take the vaccine. Many of these children are more likely to be severely ill from these diseases because of compromised immune systems. They rely on the immunity of others to prevent the spread of diseases that might kill them.

There are other issues as well. Many of them. If you want me to go into antibiotic resistance, adaptation and such I am happy to. Needless to say that this is one subject in which the selfish (and that is the "you and I" you are talking about, can not be allowed to indulge their idiotic arrogance.

These are fair points. However, I still have to wonder about what seems to me disproportionate reactions to the risk to which we expose our own and other kids every day, compared to the risk that not vaccinated children pose to others.

Just to be clear, I do think kids should be vaccinated, but I wouldn't call the behaviour of parents who don't vaccinate their kids any more "selfish arrogance" than myself getting in my car and driving down to the beach, thereby endangering kids as pedestrians and cyclists and, if I had kids, as car passengers. Add to this possible wider health issues caused by cars/motor vehicles related to pollution and I doubt that the behaviour of parents who don't vaccinate their kids is more irresponsible than what most people do every day, without even thinking about it.
#14639378
Stormsmith wrote:I'm cool with you not vaccinating your kids, providing you home school and keep them out of recreation centre/public baths, restaurants, - you know, all publicly shared spaces.
All those places where the vaccinated people mill about? But they have nothing to fear from the unvaccinated child, they have immunity injected into them, so why quarantine it?

Drlee wrote:Because there are any number of children who, for medical reasons, are unable to take the vaccine. Many of these children are more likely to be severely ill from these diseases because of compromised immune systems. They rely on the immunity of others to prevent the spread of diseases that might kill them.
You do know that vaccination doesn't magically prevent one from catching the bug, do you? Your immune system is just better equipped to deal with it, so that you show no or only mild clinical signs. Your precious few who can't be vaccinated for medical reasons, are not better off around vaccinated persons than around unvaccinated ones. If anyone should be quarantined, it is them.
#14639389
AFAIK wrote:The more carriers of a disease the more opportunities for it to mutate and become more contagious or develop immunity to current vaccines. I'm not sure if this is what adaptation means but given how much concern medical organisations have for new versions of the flu that have high fatality but low levels of contagion it is very concerning.

I don't think vaccination is the right strategy to counter that risk. A low estimate of unknown viruses in mammals is approx. 300,000. I have not found an estimate for humans, but the number of viruses that are either unknown or cause no or unknown problems must dwarf the number we currently vaccinate against. However, for all of them exists the possibility that they mutate either by going from animal to human or, as you say, become more contagious or dangerous, etc.

So I suspect vaccination makes a very small dent in the risk that mutations pose and the increase in that risk from the number of kids that are not immunised is miniscule/negligible.
#14639408
You do know that vaccination doesn't magically prevent one from catching the bug, do you? Your immune system is just better equipped to deal with it, so that you show no or only mild clinical signs.


This is nonsense. You are articulating a distinction without a difference in some cases and dead wrong in others.

All those places where the vaccinated people mill about? But they have nothing to fear from the unvaccinated child, they have immunity injected into them, so why quarantine it?


And again you are ignoring that the danger is to the unvaccinated. Unvaccinated people do impose self-quarantine at times. I utterly reject your notion that a great many people should be needlessly quarantined simply to indulge the fantasies of some deluded parents. Or worse to indulge some utterly selfish political theory.

I have no problem dragging children kicking and screaming from their mother's arms if it may save their lives or the lives of other innocent victims. I have no problem criminally prosecuting parents who endanger their children or those of others for no good reason at all. If this pisses off the libertards....fuck 'em.


I don't think vaccination is the right strategy to counter that risk. A low estimate of unknown viruses in mammals is approx. 300,000. I have not found an estimate for humans, but the number of viruses that are either unknown or cause no or unknown problems must dwarf the number we currently vaccinate against. However, for all of them exists the possibility that they mutate either by going from animal to human or, as you say, become more contagious or dangerous, etc.


Mere gibberish. You make no point at all.
#14639432
You do know that vaccination doesn't magically prevent one from catching the bug, do you? Your immune system is just better equipped to deal with it, so that you show no or only mild clinical signs.
Drlee wrote:This is nonsense. You are articulating a distinction without a difference in some cases and dead wrong in others.
Really. Do educate me how immunization works.

All those places where the vaccinated people mill about? But they have nothing to fear from the unvaccinated child, they have immunity injected into them, so why quarantine it?
And again you are ignoring that the danger is to the unvaccinated.
Stormsmith was asking for the unvaccinated child to be quarantined, so that her - vaccinated - children be safe. Since all the good and upright people and their kids are vaccinated, the unvaccinated kid is no danger to them. If that kid gets sick, it's obviously the problem of the anti-vaccination family, and not affecting the general population. So they are only a danger to themselves, not everyone else. No need to quarantine them away.

Kaiserschmarrn wrote:I don't think vaccination is the right strategy to counter that risk. A low estimate of unknown viruses in mammals is approx. 300,000. I have not found an estimate for humans, but the number of viruses that are either unknown or cause no or unknown problems must dwarf the number we currently vaccinate against. However, for all of them exists the possibility that they mutate either by going from animal to human or, as you say, become more contagious or dangerous, etc.
Mere gibberish. You make no point at all.
Her (?) point is that new viruses can come out of the huge repository that is the animal kingdom - swine flu, bird flu, anyone? Vaccination won't prevent that from happening and the hysterical demands for quarantining or forced vaccination are hilarious.

And for the record, I'm not against vaccination. I just don't think the pro-vaccination arguments in this thread are very convincing.
#14639436
I see strong parallels between the debate about vaccinations and climate change. Plenty of emotion, not enough respect for the subject.
The proponents for and against are so selfish and one eyed in their views that they're hindered in making valid and credible arguments. I'm not necessarily referring to this forum specifically, but almost anywhere the topic is canvassed. I find the whole umbrella term "anti vaxxer" offensive to rational argument, akin to "climate change denier". Labels help naught!

Regarding the children who are unable to be immunised due to medical reasons...then in my opinion it is they who should be quarantined if they deem the risk too high to mix with the general population.

What a sad life these people must lead due to hysteria! It's like brainwashing old people not to go out for fear they'll get mugged.
#14639463
Drlee wrote:Mere gibberish. You make no point at all.

How so? There are several examples of known cross-species virus transmissions in the last 100 years. Benign viruses can become deadly and we are still discovering new viruses in humans. There seems to be a virtually infinite number of possibilities how viruses which are not a problem to humans today could become destructive to us in the future.

I'd be interested in your estimate of the increase in risk that arises from mutation by all viruses, known and unknown, that is caused by the anti-vaccination crowd. And if you could tell us what your estimate is based on, that would be great.
#14639464
The arguments against vaccination are non-existent beyond the libertarian need to do what they want. Medical science is behind vaccinations, and it's a public health issue. You don't get a right to decide when your actions go against public health. Vaccinating ourselves from the diseases we can prevent makes perfect sense.

Comparing taking vaccinations to going in a car is idiotic. You putting your kid in a car is not putting someone else's kid at risk.
#14639465
Godstud wrote:Comparing taking vaccinations to going in a car is idiotic. You putting your kid in a car is not putting someone else's kid at risk.

Whenever you drive, whether with your kid or not, you are putting the kids of other people (as pedestrians, cyclists or passengers of other cars) at risk.

@ckaihatsu , you said; This is just Stalinist[…]

The End of Lukashenko is near.

Your using American definition of liberalism. Tha[…]

I do not support Trump. In fact, I think he is n[…]

Another record day for FL, cases growing faster th[…]