U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-13-2015, 09:54 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
84,985 posts, read 98,832,039 times
Reputation: 31396

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
However, the unvaccinated are sent home. The outbreak occurs. Unvaccinated are sent home.... What is the problem. So what if they were contagious before they were symptomatic. The unvaccinated (or under vaccinated) cannot spread said disease because they are sent home.
So what indeed? They spread the disease for four freaking days, and then they and the other unvaxed, most of whom have been exposed, 90% of whom once exposed will get the disease get sent home from school for the duration. Plus, the few who can't be vaxed will get it, also the few (about 1-3% with two doses of measles vax) for whom the vax didn't work. So what indeed?

 
Old 07-13-2015, 09:54 PM
 
Location: BC, Arizona
1,170 posts, read 748,101 times
Reputation: 2377
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevek64 View Post
But I can say the same for the flu as we all know how serious and deadly the flu can be to millions in this country. There are lots of vulnerable people out there who can get seriously ill or die from the flu, elderly, those with compromised immune systems, etc, that each one of us can pass on to them, in theory, because many of us have decided to not get the flu vaccine in a given year. Why don't some states or at the fed level require everyone to get the flu shot, let's say to attend school or use public space, if the true intent is to protect vulnerable people in the population, if protection of health is the true intention of these laws?




And I trust you'd be for state or national flu vaccine law to be enforced on everyone for the above reasons I've mentioned? How far should this go?



Certainly that's the way it should work. But given what I see as the overall bought off nature of politics/the influence of special interest these days on decision making, I don't see it working at all like the way our forefathers intended.
In my province (BC) health care workers are required to get flu shots.
 
Old 07-13-2015, 09:57 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
84,985 posts, read 98,832,039 times
Reputation: 31396
Quote:
Originally Posted by tlvancouver View Post
In my province (BC) health care workers are required to get flu shots.
Most in the US are required to get them as well, usually by their employers.
 
Old 07-13-2015, 09:57 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
8,435 posts, read 8,387,998 times
Reputation: 1690
Quote:
Originally Posted by kayanne View Post
Sure thing:

I have wondered, if vac rates got low enough that outbreaks of disease became huge, at that point would any of you opponents of vac mandates feel differently? Or perhaps would you choose to keep your kids home from school (and all other public places) until the epidemic subsided? Would personally knowing children who died or had serious complications from one of these diseases affect how you proceeded with your own children? (In terms of, would you get them vaccinated, or just keep them away from all people outside of your own home, or just carry on as usual and take your chances?)
My kids have a healthy diet and they are not bombarded by bleach. To some that would mean that the house is not sanitized. This is true. I think their immune system is properly primed to handle said diseases. Given that, I would not do anything. If they get it, I would treat it naturally. And if they didn't get it... well I wouldn't need to treat it.
 
Old 07-13-2015, 09:59 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
8,435 posts, read 8,387,998 times
Reputation: 1690
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt View Post
So what indeed? They spread the disease for four freaking days, and then they and the other unvaxed, most of whom have been exposed, 90% of whom once exposed will get the disease get sent home from school for the duration. Plus, the few who can't be vaxed will get it, also the few (about 1-3% with two doses of measles vax) for whom the vax didn't work. So what indeed?
On the contrary... the moment my kids develop a fever or are feeling sick.. I keep them home from school. I ere on the side of caution. Actually it is usually the case of Lice that most kids are kept from school (hopefully!).
 
Old 07-13-2015, 10:01 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,504 posts, read 26,116,900 times
Reputation: 26477
Quote:
Originally Posted by kayanne View Post
Also, when I asked about keeping unvac kids home during an epidemic, Miss Terri said unvac kids would be required to stay home. I said that makes sense, as in, it makes sense that the school would have that policy.
They are sent home to try to limit the number of people they expose. A high percentage of unvaccinated people who are exposed to measles will get sick. They have already exposed classmates before they get sick. Sending them home is just a measure of damage control, possibly getting some out of the school before they are exposed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
However, the unvaccinated are sent home. The outbreak occurs. Unvaccinated are sent home.... What is the problem. So what if they were contagious before they were symptomatic. The unvaccinated (or under vaccinated) cannot spread said disease because they are sent home.
"Contagious" means they are already spreading the disease. As Katiana said, someone with measles can spread it for four days before he knows he's sick.
 
Old 07-13-2015, 10:02 PM
 
Location: BC, Arizona
1,170 posts, read 748,101 times
Reputation: 2377
Quote:
Originally Posted by kayanne View Post
I'm confused by the bolded part, which was your response to one of my posts. You do realize I am absolutely not an anti-vaxxer, don't you?

Also, when I asked about keeping unvac kids home during an epidemic, Miss Terri said unvac kids would be required to stay home. I said that makes sense, as in, it makes sense that the school would have that policy.
I can see you're just curious, it's frustrating for those of us that have presented scientific study after study for 2600 posts proving vaccines save lives.

The "just stay home" has been stated at least 10 times by the same 3-4 anti-vaxers (I'm not putting you in thay category) who truly believe their choice not to vaccinate supersedes the rights of others to be protected from them spreading the disease (see above - "so what if my kid spreads it, send them home when they look/feel sick".). Remember, there are those that cannot be vaccinated (too young, old, compromised immune systems). The anti-vax pro choice believes their right to "choose" not to have a well tested very low risk vaccine supersedes a child who is sick with cancer's right to be medically safe at school.

The risk of a serious adverse effect from vaccines is less than one in a million. This is a game to the anti-vaxers but real life to the most vulnerable.

Edit: not directed at you Kayanne but to those with the crazy ideas - measles aren't minor like "lice"and a clean house and healthy diet are not equal to vaccines.
 
Old 07-13-2015, 10:05 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
84,985 posts, read 98,832,039 times
Reputation: 31396
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
On the contrary... the moment my kids develop a fever or are feeling sick.. I keep them home from school. I ere on the side of caution. Actually it is usually the case of Lice that most kids are kept from school (hopefully!).
Do you not get that these kids are contagious, ie spreading disease, before they have the fever or are feeling sick?

The latest recommendation for lice is not to exclude from school. But I really don't want to get into a hijack about lice.

Last edited by Katarina Witt; 07-13-2015 at 10:16 PM..
 
Old 07-13-2015, 10:15 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,504 posts, read 26,116,900 times
Reputation: 26477
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
On the contrary... the moment my kids develop a fever or are feeling sick.. I keep them home from school. I ere on the side of caution. Actually it is usually the case of Lice that most kids are kept from school (hopefully!).
What do you o if they do not get sick until they are at school?

Current recommendation is not to send kids with head lice home early from school.

CDC - Lice - Head Lice - Schools

"Students diagnosed with live head lice do not need to be sent home early from school; they can go home at the end of the day, be treated, and return to class after appropriate treatment has begun. Nits may persist after treatment, but successful treatment should kill crawling lice.
Head lice can be a nuisance but they have not been shown to spread disease. Personal hygiene or cleanliness in the home or school has nothing to do with getting head lice.
Both the American Association of Pediatrics and the National Association of School Nurses advocate that "no-nit" policies should be discontinued. "No-nit" policies that require a child to be free of nits before they can return to schools should be discontinued for the following reasons:

Many nits are more than inch from the scalp. Such nits are usually not viable and very unlikely to hatch to become crawling lice, or may in fact be empty shells, also known as casings.
Nits are cemented to hair shafts and are very unlikely to be transferred successfully to other people.
The burden of unnecessary absenteeism to the students, families and communities far outweighs the risks associated with head lice.
Misdiagnosis of nits is very common during nit checks conducted by nonmedical personnel."

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevek64 View Post
But I can say the same for the flu as we all know how serious and deadly the flu can be to millions in this country. There are lots of vulnerable people out there who can get seriously ill or die from the flu, elderly, those with compromised immune systems, etc, that each one of us can pass on to them, in theory, because many of us have decided to not get the flu vaccine in a given year. Why don't some states or at the fed level require everyone to get the flu shot, let's say to attend school or use public space, if the true intent is to protect vulnerable people in the population, if protection of health is the true intention of these laws?
That just goes to show how allowing people to voluntarily vaccinate their children without school mandates does not work, doesn't it?

What if stores started putting up signs during flu season telling people not to enter if they have not been vaccinated?

Quote:
And I trust you'd be for state or national flu vaccine law to be enforced on everyone for the above reasons I've mentioned? How far should this go?

Certainly that's the way it should work. But given what I see as the overall bought off nature of politics/the influence of special interest these days on decision making, I don't see it working at all like the way our forefathers intended.
Your "national flu vaccine law" will never exist unless the majority of the voters want it.
 
Old 07-13-2015, 10:18 PM
 
11,898 posts, read 9,624,570 times
Reputation: 16275
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
However, your choice not to vaccinate can make someone else sick, including an infant too young to be vaccinated.

If your unvaccinated child gets a baby sick who would have been vaccinated at the appropriate time, your choice not to vaccinate your child has preempted that baby's parents' choice to vaccinate.

When you figure out a way to keep unvaccinated children from passing vaccine preventable disease to other families, let us know.
Don't you remember, from pages and pages ago now?? It's the parents of the kid who got it from an unvaccinated kid's fault for not properly shielding their child from the sick unvaccinated child! The unvaccinated child and parents prance around spreading the disease if and when they get it, because whoops sorry my little precious sneezed and got some pertussis on you (haha my bad - I mean yours), so everyone better watch out because it is certainly NOT the parents of the unvaccinated kid, aka the minority's, job to shield their kid from everyone else when they're sick, oh no, it's all the other parents' job. If you have a baby who is too young to be vaccinated, or otherwise a child who for some reason cannot be, and MY kid has a vaccine preventable disease he or she got because I made the choice to not vaccinate then YOU better get your kid away from mine. If not... whoops, sucks for you. Guess you should have physically shielded your kid better from mine, hope he doesn't die now.



Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
Because vaccines do not always work, there are babies too young to be vaccinated, and there are people with weakened immune systems who are vulnerable to these diseases even if they have been vaccinated, like the woman who recently died from measles here in the US.

Your choice not to vaccinate affects the rest of us. We've decided to take measures to reduce the risk not vaccinating creates.
There you go, being right again. How dare you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
Infleunza is not eradicable because it mutates so readily and has non-human reservoirs. That's why you see references to bird flu and swine flu.
Yup. I learned this basic stuff in high school.

Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
My kids have a healthy diet and they are not bombarded by bleach. To some that would mean that the house is not sanitized. This is true. I think their immune system is properly primed to handle said diseases. Given that, I would not do anything. If they get it, I would treat it naturally. And if they didn't get it... well I wouldn't need to treat it.
I was about to be shocked at this... then I realized it was coming from you. Carry on.
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.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top