Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is so arrogant. For many, their religious views don't subscribe 100% with one religious authority or another. Many people are religious without being a part of organized religion. Just because the pope is willing to accept vaccines that have been made with cells derived via aborted fetal cells, does not mean that all Christians or even people with their own religious views will agree with his interpretation. Other people's religious views are not for you or the state or the school district to decide. Religion is personal for many.
Definitely impossible to prove a believe, as well as impossible to disprove one. This atheist is well aware. Lol
I'm obviously not religious but I have learned to respect others beliefs. If we now have a country that won't, I think it will backfire. It's a mistake to take out religious exemption. Imo.
Still can't seem to find the names in front of your replies to know who your talking to but.....I'll just leave it all be because like you I'm using a pad.
I admire this experiment to rid the world of infectious diseases, I really do. But....even if the risk of injuries or death are low it won't look so good as an accomplishment if people were coerced and threatened to participate for the greater good. Especially when the facts are that some of these kids will suffer that small chance of death or injury. This WILL cause a problem.
Volunteer, yes great, threatened participation, not so ethical.
Science is not a religion, it's supposed to be challenged. You can't use studies like you're quoting the bible . There's no God of science. A study only last in its valid state until proven otherwise. Science doesn't claim perfection so I would be careful with that.
There are a lot of things we don't do that other countries do for good reasons.
So we should do what other countries do, except when we shouldn't?
I actually agree with you PoppySead, what other countries do is not important to me. I don't care what they're doing in Europe (seen by some on this forum as a single country), or Australia, or Asia, or wherever. That's not to say we can't all learn from each other and share information.
Location: Subconscious Syncope, USA (Northeastern US)
2,365 posts, read 2,148,041 times
Reputation: 3814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt
What's to admit? At some point in time, some of these vaccines may require a booster. Hep B has been around about 30 years now, no boosters recommended yet. Ask the Experts about Hepatitis B Vaccines - CDC experts answer Q&As "Studies indicate that immunologic memory remains intact for at least 20 years and confers protection against clinical illness and chronic HBV infection, even though anti-HBs levels that once measured adequate might become low or decline below detectable levels. If one is challenged with HBV, people whose immune systems are competent will mount an anamnestic response and develop protective anti-HBs. Studies are on-going to assess whether booster doses of hepatitis B vaccine will be needed in the future."
I don't know why you're saying "Bye-bye herd immunity". Not all adults are UTD now, as you keep saying.
I dont know what B vaccine they are using now. In the mid 90s I was required to have the series of shots for a job. I had them, as the job required potential contact with body fluids - it was an OSHA guideline.
In 2001, I was tested again at another job, and was no longer showing any immunity. I did not need the series again, as the new job was clerical and involved minimal patient contact. No fluids or blood to possibly come in contact with. It was reccommended that I have it again, due to the fact I am 1 of 170 million people - a 'baby boomer' - living with HCV. Sound advice, no doubt.
However, The injections were very painful. Each more painful than the last, to the point at times I need a sling because my left arm hurt so bad. I chose not to do it again. Im not in major risk categories for contracting HBV. I never came into contact with infected body fluids at the first job mentioned that I am aware of. I simply used a gloved hand to put baggies of specimens in a metal box for pick up by a lab. I was not the one that drew blood or processed the samples for testing.
My only risk category for becoming HCV infected that I know of is a blood transfusion. There is also a possibility of contracting it from my mother - also a 'baby boomer' - but that chance is less than 5%, if it can be shown she ever had it. Im not about to dig her up to find out.
Even though Im religious, when faced with the fact of "die now or take the blood" - I took the blood. I had no reserve blood, so it was imperative to take the blood. I could actually hear the blood squishing through my temples, was sleeping 11 or more hours a day, and finally presented at the ER because I felt like I was going to die. Even today, there is a .07% chance of catching something from a blood tranfusion, thanks to these sophisticated viruses that manage to stay 1 step ahead of science.
I agree with Poppy. My family growing up, and even I looked at Doctors as Gods until I experienced an easily avoidable screw-up.
Money is an issue with admiting mistakes. If medicine was socialized, and anyone could become a doctor based on the European models, that liability would be greatly reduced, and people who want to help people would become doctors, rather than people who only are looking for high pay and a comfortable lifestyle. This would do nothing to solve problems with governments and manufacturers though.
In my case 2 seperate doctors screwed up. The first could have prevented my needing the emergency room through diagnostics. I would have still needed surgery for an ectopic pregnancy, but it wouldnt have been after spending 15 more days with a slow leak from the ruptured tube, based on the diagnosis (or lack their of) of my OB/Gyn. He came highly recommended from Doctors I to this day highly respect, but he turned out not to be worth much respect at all, as I felt simply brushed off when I went to him about the problem. I did follow his instructions, and simply go home.
In the ED, the 2nd could have avoided the blood transfusion by not simply moving along with the first doctors diagnosis and giving me a D&C. Again, diagnostics could have prevented it, provided those doing the diagnosing had a clue. They couldnt even agree on what they were seeing with ultrasound I finally recieved - they couldnt tell if they were looking at bowels or a fetus.
An elderly nurse saved my life by going over the 2nd doctors head after an arguement regarding whether or not I was suffering from internal bleeding. The doctor wanted to release me. It turns out she was right and the doctor was wrong. A more experience doctor also saved my life by showing up to clean up this mess.
If anyone thinks for a second that my mind didnt change from that experience they are sadly wrong. I started researching anything a doctor tells me from that point on, and making my own choices about what is to be done with me. If I turn out to be wrong, noone is to blame but me.
I just started treatment for HCV because the treatment I was waiting for is showing good results - up to 97% cure/remission rate for patients that were not previously treated. It was my choice to wait, and even healthcare professionals that are also HCV+ tell me I made the right choice. That was not what random professionals were telling me while I was waiting.
And, in case you are wondering, no I did not sue at that time. It may not have been a perfect experience, but in the end, someone saved my life.
Last edited by ConeyGirl52; 06-06-2015 at 11:23 AM..
First of all to imply religious people are liars is just personally how you feel about religious people. Some don't like the abortion issue and vaccines have a tie to that. I respect a lot of people I don't agree with, you should try it.
Ah, the rest of this post is just the same thing. Full of your sad opinions of people for one reason or the other. I get you don't have to respect others that differ in opinion, and you can call them liars, and stupid if you want but it's not a good reply for me as it leads to just a back and forth bashing post.
There are a lot of things we do that harm others, and they are legal and people do them everyday. That really isn't a reason for me. But if it works for you then as you've stated, that's what matters.
As far as the reality of our healthcare systems, I don't think the stats for injury and death are too off base. I have quite a few friends and relatives that are nurses/doctors and they have some pretty interesting stories about the quality of staff and healthcare where they work. But feel free to explain it away, not all statistics pan out to be true for anything do they, good or bad. It is what you think it is after all. But, it does make some people worried about a healthcare professionals opinion, and treatment. So telling people to trust all medical opinion is not going to work for those people who've suffered from a medical mistake, had bad reaction to meds, etc. If you can't understand that then nothing one can do.
I halve never said religious people are liars. I have said non-religious people who claim religious exemptions are lying. I also still think that if you are a nominal member of a religious denomination that does not oppose vaccination that your claim for an exemption for a religious reasons is on shaky ground.
You can question medicine all you wish, but the science behind vaccines is on solid ground. The vaccine refusers have not a single valid reason to not vaccinate any healthy child. The risk is just too small. Meanwhile, they let kids participate in risky activities every single day. How many anti-vax moms drive and use cell phones - with their children in the car?k
What legal things do you think people can do which harm others without consequences? Do those things and we will see you in court.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead
If you live here it's different from what its been. This is about California. And now, not everyone in California has a right to a public education. You might take this lightly because it doesn't apply to you.
Everyone in California will still have a right to a public education if this law passes. There will be requirements to take advantage of it. If you choose not to follow the rules, you are the one who is responsible for the consequences, not the government.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead
Are they mandated to not have kids? Last I heard they had a choice. Apples and oranges.
As has been pointed out, schools are not paid for solely by people who have kids. If someone who chooses to be childless has to pay taxes, so should someone who chooses not to vaccinate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead
There are a lot of kids in public and private schools out here right now that don't have certain vaccines because they feel they are unsafe or have religious opposition to them because of the aborted fetus tissue. Some get most but dont want all. If the bill passes they will not be allowed at school. Homeschooling is not part of the rights to free public education statue. Some of them can't homeschool they both work.
I get that some of you think they deserve it but, thats not solving the problem. They will still be part of society, libraries, play areas, theme parks, dentists, doctors, beaches, craft programs, relatives, restaurants, public toilets, airplanes, buses, trains, etc. It's not solving much, it's coercion, and it's segregating, but it's not a great solution.
In my opinion this could back fire and cause people to reject vaccines they might have gotten for political and moral reasons.
I think new incentive programs and transparent facts would do more. Some people are hard core anti vax, some are hard core vax but most of us are in the middle of the road and would like to see a more peaceful program for awareness that a lines with our freedom to make choices for our kids.
We'll see what happens, but the candidates for office seats seem to be pandering to one extreme side or another. Using it for their campaign. Doesn't make for a good climate.
There are only certain things we can do here with all the foreign traveling and being a popular destination. Disease will always find it's way here. Even with the mandate. Get an un vaxed homeschooler and a foreigner with measles together at a theme park and its the same thing. We can't eliminate them from our society.
I'll leave the other states to those who live there until it becomes a national mandate. I don't agree but I don't live there and didn't vote for it.
There is no tissue from abortions actually in vaccines. Virus for some vaccines is grown in cells that are many generations distant from the originally aborted cells. It is incorrect to imply that abortions are being done in order to make vaccines. The abortions that provided the cells cannot be undone. Using the tissue to start cell lines that are used to grow virus for vaccines in a sense provides a redeeming purpose for those abortions.
Get one untaxed person in contact with someone with measles and we have one case of measles unless the unvaxed person exposes dozens more who are also unvaxed. That is where increasing the vax rate helps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead
You might feel differently if they were mandating circumcision to stop the spread of stds in school by denying your right to a public education based on the CDCs recommendations if your child doesn't have it done.
Or, maybe not. Maybe you'd get circumcised instead.
Home schooling isnt public education. It's just teaching your own kids what you want. You can unschool as well but its not the same as a right to publicly funded education.
The CDC never advocated a mandate for circumcision. It has only said there are medical benefits to the procedure that outweigh the risks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead
Well, I do agree that it seems inevitable. And, I can't really fight a majority, nor do I want to. I'm just concerned with the ripple effects of mandates. I don't have much at stake with this one, my kids were vaccinated and all but one goes to college now.
I do have compassion for those who truly believe these will harm their kids. Or are afraid they might be the ones who will get those injuries. But, for me it's all about keeping our country free to make choices. One of the greatest things to me about our country is the right to be a minority, even in view only and still have basic rights. It's worth it to me, I understand it isn't to everyone and on this issue it seems the majority do feel those rights can be withheld.
I honestly don't think this will make any difference in the amount of break outs we have in America. But, time will tell on that one.
I also have a hard time with mandating in a for profit healthcare but, we mandate the healthcare to so, lol, no point in worrying about it anymore I guess.
I'm really glad we could finally have a civil conversation about this, though. I appreciate it.
We will still have outbreaks, but with high vaccination rates there will be fewer cases per outbreak.
One person's choice should not hurt another person. Your choice to not vaccinate can lead to other people getting sick. When the situation gets to the point where diseases that have been eliminated start resurging, mandates are justified.
None of you are old enough to remember smallpox. I am and my parents were delighted to have me receive that vaccine. Most in my age group have a small circular scar on their upper left arm, mine is on my thigh.
The death rate for children in my parent's generation from smallpox was VERY HIGH. Because I and those older than I received that vaccine smallpox has been eradicated. And, yes, some children became sick from the vaccine.
I would first state that I am religous, but I do not believe that "faith healing" is 100% effective in people experiencing any problems. For me to believe in good, I have to believe in evil, and as the song says "puzzling you is the nature of my (Satan, Lucifer, evil's, etc) game."
At the same time, doctors and scientists are just as susceptible to be "puzzled and puzzling others" as anyone else is - from my religous perspective. They are not God, and cannot, as matter-of-factly put a theory forth on the amount of hairs on any given head like God is said to be able to do accurately and instantly.
I do believe many educated people have the inflated-ego to put forth a current theory as undeniable fact - even though scientists easily disagree with each other. Being poor and having no certficate from a college to prove you have a working brain, does not equate that those people you (rhetorical, and necessarily you personally) talk down too are complete babbling idiots either
There are reports and studies that rationally and educatedly show that pro-flu vaccination 'facts' can be more harmful than other methods of preventing the flu, as intelligently as those 'facts' themselves were formed and presented.
To answer your question, short and sweet, how could it not be guessed that using images and even non-related diseases that carry us back to at least 1918-1919 in the US to promote widespread use of the vaccine would NOT raise at lease some if not all eyebrows of the masses? Is there not a more intelligent way to encourage us to accept the pro-vaccination 'facts' than these scare tactics?
Are scientists and governments all 'good'?
You merely need to go back to 1932 to Tuskegee, Alabama to see that they are not. There may even be more vivid and recent examples like the controversy envolving the Gulf War Vets and their vaccinations, but Tuskegee is the one that comes to mind ...
The only thing I dispute in this mere hub is selectively using B Vitamins. A B-Complex should be used, and a nutritionist should certainly understand why.
Here is some of the science behind this hub article in regard to vitamin D3 -
It can hardly be stated that side effects of probiotics and vitamin D3 are as harmful to the body as aluminum, mercury and formaldehyde - just to name a few. Our bodies will simply release most vitamins that we dont need when we urinate or deficate. Heavy metals build up and stay with us for a lifetime.
I agree with you that testing is not realistic when it comes to MMR. I have worked for an allergist, and he had no way in his office to test anyone for an antibiotic allergy that I ever became aware of. He was geared to mold fungus dust pollen and things like that.
However, if the ability was readily available, the cost would be negligible compared to the cost of sustaining an impaired life, or burying a child.
You have extremes everywhere - people who rely (or try to) solely on "faith healing" - and, yes! There are documented cases of people who cleared all sorts of conditions from their body through practices such as visual imaging. In contrast, I also understand that, "The good Lord helps those that help themselves."
My beef is with people who claim a religious vaccine exemption whose only religious belief about vaccines is that they do not want them because of unwarranted fear of side effects. That has nothing to do with religion.
Religions that proscribe vaccination are scarce. Religious exemptions should be scarce. They are not.
Please stop accusing pro vax positions as being fearmongering. We should be afraid of these diseases, and people who have never seen them need to know what they can do. I have not heard you say a word about the anti-vax side's strident insistence that vaccines cause all sorts of problems without any evidence to support that position. That is true fearmongering.
There is no reason not to vaccinate and also do whatever you want with diet. You need to be aware that vitamin D can be dangerous in high amounts. One supplement salesman poisoned himself with his own product, which contained a massive overdose of vitamin D.
There is no reason to ever mention mercury in a vaccine discussion ever again. It is no longer in any children's vaccine. It has definitively been shown not to cause harm when it was used. The other ingredients in vaccines cause no harm in the doses used. We get far more aluminum from the environment than from vaccines, and the human body makes more formaldehyde than the tiny amounts in vaccines. When you make statements that mention mercury, aluminum, and formaldehyde in a discussion here, it seems to me that you are indeed supporting an anti-vax position. By the way, the mercury used in vaccines in the past does not accumulate.
Mention of the Tuskegee events in connection with vaccines is being deliberately inflammatory and is uncalled for. Do you have any evidence that such activity is happening in 2015? If not, do not bring it up again, please. It has no relevance to vaccines.
Science is not static. It changes when new evidence appears. But if a scientist disagrees with current thinking he needs to have good reason to do so. There is no reason to challenge the current thinking on vaccines.
Allergy testing for topical antibiotics is standard. Any allergist can do it.
Neomycin allergy is a reason not to take a vaccine that might contain it. That does not mean that someone who is allergic to it will die or be maimed for life he takes such a vaccine, only that he might have an allergic reaction to it: hives or possibly anaphylaxis. Both are treatable, though the latter can be life threatening.
Well, to be fair they could say you can homeschool if you are afraid of disease transmission from going to school since it isn't that common.
Car accidents happen more, so do a lot of other things at school. That's not an argument I'd find valid. There will be non vaccinated kids at school for medical reasons who could bring it there if they were exposed outside of school. There are a lot of what ifs one could use toward their agenda.
You use that one because your agenda is to try and reach kids so that eventually more people as a whole are vaccinated, I get that. But, for me it's not enough to mandate this.
The only thing paying taxes for a free education might do is give them cause to sue for it, since they paid for it. IDK.
The CDC recommends it to teens because they spread it through sexual contact with their peers, in and out of school. Recommending vaccines for school is just part of reaching a larger populous not to prevent schools from disease. Same with their program to encourage circumcision, which they've been targeting parents and doctors for lately. They recommended making circumcision mandatory in 2009. I have no reason to think they wouldn't do it again.
It's just a means to get more to do it. Not a cure for transmission in school. Part of these programs is to encourage these things at a young age. It's easier than reaching older people. They are correct, but I don't think it will make for good relations between the health professionals and their patients.
My example was hypothetical of course but if this mandate happens at the recommendation of the CDC then there is nothing that makes me think more won't be on the way.
If the rest of us vaccinate, the risk that a child with a true medical exemption will be exposed to a vaccine preventable disease decreases immensely, whether he is in school or not.
The CDC never suggested that circumcision be mandatory. It only said the medical benefits exceed the risk.
Mandates are justified because vaccine preventable diseases that had been eliminated are coming back. It will be interesting to see how many people think sending their kid to school trumps any concerns they have about vaccines.
Please stop accusing pro vax positions as being fearmongering. We should be afraid of these diseases, and people who have never seen them need to know what they can do.
I've had the flu, chicken pox and rotavirus and I would say that I think some of the "pro-vaxx for everyone" posters have deeply overblown these illnesses in attempt to scare people into getting vaccinated for them.
Location: Subconscious Syncope, USA (Northeastern US)
2,365 posts, read 2,148,041 times
Reputation: 3814
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010
My beef is with people who claim a religious vaccine exemption whose only religious belief about vaccines is that they do not want them because of unwarranted fear of side effects. That has nothing to do with religion.
Religions that proscribe vaccination are scarce. Religious exemptions should be scarce. They are not.
Please stop accusing pro vax positions as being fearmongering. We should be afraid of these diseases, and people who have never seen them need to know what they can do. I have not heard you say a word about the anti-vax side's strident insistence that vaccines cause all sorts of problems without any evidence to support that position. That is true fearmongering.
There is no reason not to vaccinate and also do whatever you want with diet. You need to be aware that vitamin D can be dangerous in high amounts. One supplement salesman poisoned himself with his own product, which contained a massive overdose of vitamin D.
There is no reason to ever mention mercury in a vaccine discussion ever again. It is no longer in any children's vaccine. It has definitively been shown not to cause harm when it was used. The other ingredients in vaccines cause no harm in the doses used. We get far more aluminum from the environment than from vaccines, and the human body makes more formaldehyde than the tiny amounts in vaccines. When you make statements that mention mercury, aluminum, and formaldehyde in a discussion here, it seems to me that you are indeed supporting an anti-vax position. By the way, the mercury used in vaccines in the past does not accumulate.
Mention of the Tuskegee events in connection with vaccines is being deliberately inflammatory and is uncalled for. Do you have any evidence that such activity is happening in 2015? If not, do not bring it up again, please. It has no relevance to vaccines.
Science is not static. It changes when new evidence appears. But if a scientist disagrees with current thinking he needs to have good reason to do so. There is no reason to challenge the current thinking on vaccines.
Allergy testing for topical antibiotics is standard. Any allergist can do it.
Neomycin allergy is a reason not to take a vaccine that might contain it. That does not mean that someone who is allergic to it will die or be maimed for life he takes such a vaccine, only that he might have an allergic reaction to it: hives or possibly anaphylaxis. Both are treatable, though the latter can be life threatening.
We cant have a discussion if you arent listening.
I have Hep C. I have to protect my liver at all costs. Im one of those special cases you keep claiming you want to protect.
Im not, however, going to do anything to poison my liver, or help add heavy metals to a compromised liver. I dont drink alcohol and havent for a couple decades, and likewise I am not interested in anything that I have to be injected with or ingest a heavy metal to use and allegedly benefit from. There is no benefit for me to accumulating heavy metals in my liver.
I have been living with Hep C since at least 1993. My hepascore is F0. I must be doing something right to have no damage so far.
You want to deny scare tactics, but yet say we should be afraid? Okay. *shrugs*
Mentioning Tuskegee is uncalled for - to you. Tell an African American Tuskegee mentioning is uncalled for.
You want to err on the side of, Id rather risk dying or being harmed now, than see if I ever get the disease.
I want to err on the side of, if I ever get the disease, I will see if I want to risk damage to my liver to prevent it happening again, or maybe rely on the immunity I achieved by having the disease in the first place.
This is so arrogant. For many, their religious views don't subscribe 100% with one religious authority or another. Many people are religious without being a part of organized religion. Just because the pope is willing to accept vaccines that have been made with cells derived via aborted fetal cells, does not mean that all Christians or even people with their own religious views will agree with his interpretation. Other people's religious views are not for you or the state or the school district to decide. Religion is personal for many.
Did you know that the Rubella vaccine prevents many fetuses from miscarrying during pregnancy? It also prevents hordes of birth defects ranging from heart problems to nervous system disorders. This article estimates that the vaccine saves thousands of them. Vaccination probably reduces the number of miscarriages in the USA by 5,000 per year. The source for this statement is former Catholic Pope Benedict XVI. Its a big reason the Catholic Church is not opposed to the the use of the MMR vaccine despite the fact that it has a slim connection to aborted fetal cells.
Your statement about religious views is interesting. I think problem here is that people can't clearly understand the difference between a religious exemption from vaccination and a personal exemption. If a state grants a religious exemption, it is not the province of government to say that one form of belief is better than another form. However, it is a completely legitimate form of inquiry to inquire as to whether the beliefs are bonafide or not. Evidence that might suggest the beliefs are bonafide would be proof that one was a longstanding member of a church like the Christian Scientists. Actually, membership in any organized religious body that holds religious services would be acceptable proof, so long as that church professed some kind of opposition to medicines or vaccines. On the other hand, if one couldn't show membership in any such denomination it raises questions as to whether the applicant is entitled to the exemption.
This may seem a non-legitimate inquiry to you. However, it is used by the IRS and other government agencies for tax and regulatory purposes. My favorite one was when the IRS had to determine whether Scientology was a church or not. Think about it. If such inquiries were not made by government agencies, millions of people would try to establish a "church" or "religion" simply to avoid paying taxes. Occasionally, legal disputes occur between different groups that claim entitlement to a church and its property. These are cases where courts have to decide questions about whether religious beliefs are bonafide or not.
A small minority does oppose vaccination, but it has nothing to do with religion. These people are entitled to exemption in a state that maintains a "personal exemption". If the state has no personal exemption this group is not entitled to be exempt from vaccination. Those who would qualify for a personal exemption are not entitled to convert that into a religious exemption, unless their reasoning is truly founded on religious beliefs.
Last edited by markg91359; 06-06-2015 at 09:12 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This atheist is well aware. Lol
Is there not a more intelligent way to encourage us to accept the pro-vaccination 'facts' than these scare tactics?