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 07-31-2015, 07:45 PM
 
Location: Marquette, Mich
1,024 posts, read 385,810 times
Reputation: 2328

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
Yet you agree that exposure doesn't happen in the school environment so why is it mandated for attendance?
Because that's the population that needs protection. Why else?

 
Old 07-31-2015, 07:53 PM
 
Location: Marquette, Mich
1,024 posts, read 385,810 times
Reputation: 2328
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri View Post
Forcing those people out of school who are not vaccinated or under vaccinated will not end your interactions with them. You'll still have contact with "those kids" at your local grocery store, library, parks and rec center, neighborhood pool, restaurants, afterschool activities such as sports, art, music, camps, museums, parks, etc. This law is not going to make you safer.
Fewer people exposing fewer people vulnerable will reduce illness. I don't know how you do math, but it works out no matter how I calculate it.

Oh, and I want you to know that when someone is raped, when the dust settles, having ANY STD can be devastating. And having one that can lead to cancer, well it sucks. Don't be so crass as to suggest it's not something someone would worry about. Because it may not be in the moments, hours, or days after an attack. But later, even years later, something like that can set a victim back and devastate her all over again. I would suggest if you are not in that company, you do not presume to speak for it.
 
Old 07-31-2015, 08:53 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,543 posts, read 26,155,710 times
Reputation: 26553
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri View Post
If that's true then you'll still have unvaccinated folks hanging out with other unvaccinated folks in clusters. Instead of being in school they will be at the mall, the movies, the library, the roller rink, the museum, in your kid's summer camp, on your child's soccer team, in your son's after school art class, at your favorite restaurant, at the grocery store, in the waiting room at the doctor and dentist.
I would hope that summer camps and organized sports would mandate vaccination. Doctors are increasingly declining to accept unvaccinated children in their practices. Perhaps dentists will follow suit. The other exposure pose less of a risk, and in the environments you describe it is unlikely that large numbers of unvaccinated children would be in the same place at the same time.

Quote:
Legal does not always mean it's ethical. Serious adverse effects have been reported post HPV vaccine. Just because the industry won't admit it does not make those injuries disappear into thin air.
"Industry" constantly looks for adverse effects of vaccines. They are closely monitored, perhaps more closely than any other drug. The interesting thing about adverse drug effects is that they tend to be limited. Ten thousand parents claiming vaccines cause everything from SIDS to multiple sclerosis just cannot accept that SIDS happens at the ages when kids are getting vaccines, that SIDS deaths are not more common after vaccines. MS does not happen more often after a vaccine than in the absence of a vaccine. All of the "injuries" that parents have claimed are caused by HPV vaccine just do not hold up when they are investigated. If ten thousand parents claim ten thousand different injuries from a vaccine, there is a strong chance the vaccine was responsible for none of them.

Quote:
Injuries are real. Parents have been ignored. Intussuception is still a risk factor with the current rotavirus vaccine. Personally I'd choose to risk the diarrhea of rotavirus over the risk of intussuception that comes with the vaccine.
Again, your inability to assess risk is apparent. The increased risk of intussusception with the current vaccines is 1 to 3 cases per 100,000 infants. That is 40 to 120 infants per year. Most intussusceptions do not need surgery for treatment and the mortality rate in the US is low. Before the introduction of a rotavirus vaccine, rotavirus illness caused in an estimated 55,000 to 70,000 hospitalizations and 20-60 deaths in children under 5 years of age in the United States each year.

I know you believe you are super mom and could nurse a baby through a bout of rotavirus infection. Unfortunately, that is not always possible. A sick, dehydrated baby may not be able to nurse. Personally, I would prefer to spare an infant that experience.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Vaccines/RotaVSB.h

"Some, but not all, studies suggest that RotaTeq and Rotarix vaccines may possibly cause a small increase in the risk of intussusception. It is possible that an estimated 1 to 3 U.S. infants out of 100,000 might develop intussusception within 7 days of getting their first dose of rotavirus vaccine. That means 40 to 120 vaccinated U.S. infants might develop intussusception each year.

The benefits of rotavirus vaccines in preventing hospitalizations and deaths from rotavirus illness far outweigh the small possible risk of intussusception. Rotavirus vaccines prevent more than 65,000 hospitalizations from rotavirus illness. CDC continues to recommend routine rotavirus vaccination of U.S. infants."

Quote:
I'm not minimizing the risk. There are many strains of HPV, not all are covered with the vaccine. The reason for the vaccine is to prevent cervical cancer and considering the risk of cervical cancer is low with routine pap exams, there is no good reason to force this vaccine on school children. Obviously condoms will not prevent skin to skin exposure to HPV but they do reduce the risk. If you are having sex with someone who you are in an established relationship with and or to procreate then you can get an HPV test beforehand.
The new Gardasil protects against the strains associated with 90% of cancers. Saying "not all are covered" ignores that fact.

The reason for the vaccine is to prevent cancers caused by the strains in the vaccine. Not all of those cancers are cervical cancer. Is there a reason that you do not want to accept that HPV causes cancers in sites other than the female cervix?

There are no HPV tests for males.

There is no equivalent to the Pap smear for throat cancer.

Testing after you are in a relationship does not do much good if one partner has already been infected.


Quote:
Plenty of people have doubts.
Doubts based on internet anecdotes, not sound data.

Quote:
We are talking about the freedom to have control over our bodies and what we do with them. My points are relevant to the conversation. Thanks for letting us know how far you'd like to take things in terms of forcing people to do things against their will and for letting us know how much power and control you'd like to hand over the government.
As I said, I do not think parents should be allowed to kill their children by withholding life saving medical care. That is, in my opinion, not only unethical but criminal, and parents have gone to jail for doing it.

Quote:
I am making informed decisions that are in the best interest of their health and wellness. You not agreeing does not make you right and me wrong. This discussion goes beyond what is happening in CA.
Bad data results in bad decisions. Internet stories are bad data.
 
Old 07-31-2015, 09:36 PM
 
8,546 posts, read 5,273,203 times
Reputation: 9115
Quote:
Originally Posted by leebeemi View Post
Fewer people exposing fewer people vulnerable will reduce illness. I don't know how you do math, but it works out no matter how I calculate it.

Oh, and I want you to know that when someone is raped, when the dust settles, having ANY STD can be devastating. And having one that can lead to cancer, well it sucks. Don't be so crass as to suggest it's not something someone would worry about. Because it may not be in the moments, hours, or days after an attack. But later, even years later, something like that can set a victim back and devastate her all over again. I would suggest if you are not in that company, you do not presume to speak for it.
I sincerely apologize if I offended you in anyway with my comment. I do understand your point regarding the re-victimization that could come with contracting an STD from a rapist. I still do not believe that the HPV vaccine should be mandated as a school requirement. It should be a choice. I find the idea of mandates without exemptions to be very offensive and wrong. I'm anti-force and pro-choice.
 
Old 07-31-2015, 09:44 PM
 
8,546 posts, read 5,273,203 times
Reputation: 9115
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
More importantly, telling kids not to have sex--or abstinence programs-- doesn't work. The study referenced in this article showed that such programs had no affect on the frequency that teens either had sex or had sex wearing a condom.

https://www.gse.upenn.edu/node/477

I'm going through the process of parenting a teenage daughter right now. Sometimes, you can talk, reason, threaten, and yell until you are blue (or even purple) and your kids still aren't going to listen to you. Once children are older than about twelve, you can't control everything they do even if you think you can. The parents that I worry the most about are those who believe they are in complete control after that age.

The HPV vaccine is a welcome addition. Parents should want their children to get all the protection that they can get.

I would support making it a mandatory vaccine. I also realize given some attitudes about sex and abstinence that some people will continue to oppose this and it probably won't happen. The price will be unnecessary deaths from cervical cancer. Think about that: Is "discouraging immorality" worth hundreds of lives every year?

Mark, I agree that you can't stop a teen who has decided that they are ready for sex from having it. That said, I firmly believe that the HPV vaccination should remain a choice and not be mandated. If you wish and desire to get it for your children, no one will deter you from making that choice. You are free to do so. People do need to retain the right to choose.

Unnecessary deaths from cervical cancer will always be a result of infrequent paps, not due to people opting out of getting the vaccine for HPV. I hope that when you get the vaccine for your daughters you also educate them on the importance of routine pap smears and condoms. Maybe even take them to the clinic for that first visit. A lot of young women put that off due to fear of the unknown. A lot of young women are scared. Getting past that first visit is key. Of course the decision on whether or not to do that is your choice.
 
Old 07-31-2015, 10:38 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,543 posts, read 26,155,710 times
Reputation: 26553
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri View Post
Unnecessary deaths from cervical cancer will always be a result of infrequent paps, not due to people opting out of getting the vaccine for HPV.
The woman who is vaccinated before her first sexual experience will be protected against 90% of the strains of HPV associated with cancer. She is highly likely never to have an abnormal Pap at all, much less develop cancer. The man who is vaccinated before his first sexual experience will stand a great chance of never developing an HPV associated cancer, either.

Cervical cancer accounts for less than half of HPV associated cancers:

CDC - How Many Cancers Are Linked with HPV Each Year?


Number [of cancers] probably caused by HPV†
__________ Male Female Both Sexes
Anus ______ 1,400****2,600*** 4,000
Cervix _________ 0***10,400***10,400
Oropharynx_ 7,200*** 1,800*** 9,000
Penis ______ 700********0**** 700
Vagina________ 0***** 600**** 600
Vulva_________ 0*** 2,200**** 2,200
TOTAL_____ 9,300** 17,600 ***26,900
†Individual cells may not sum to total due to rounding.

Pap smears are not the solution!!!!!! to HPV. Pap smears do not prevent HPV infections, they can only find it after it is already present. Pap smears will not find the 16,500 cancers per year at sites other than the female cervix.

Women will still need to be tested (increasingly by testing for HPV itself rather than having a Pap smear) because of the risk of getting a high risk strain of HPV that the vaccine will not protect against.

This totally ignores the people who will never develop genital warts because they were vaccinated, and it also ignores herd immunity, which is already being detected due to the vaccine.
 
Old 08-01-2015, 12:12 AM
 
Location: Washington state
4,688 posts, read 2,310,557 times
Reputation: 13722
Forget it, Suzy. You're doing a wonderful job, but these are the people who would rather get sick and take their chances with the illness, than not get sick at all. They think it's better to get cholera and then just use supportive care to get well (good luck on that one). They think it's better to get cancer and have to pay all that money to treat it and take a chance on having it cured than to not get it at all. These are people who WANT to get sick, so they can spend money at the hospital, force higher insurance rates on all of us, or even have their own kids OR someone else die, just because they can't do risk assessment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post

It's really not that hard to understand. Immunity from vaccination (exposure to pathogen) is the same as being exposed to the pathogen without symptoms (being affected).
For the millionth time, no, it's not. Let's take smallpox as an example.

Do you have any idea how many people died of smallpox before there was a vaccine for it?

In the 18th century alone, 400,000 Europeans died each year from smallpox. In the 20th century, the World Health Organization estimated about 300-500 million deaths. As late as the 18th century, smallpox killed every 10th child born in Sweden and France. During the same century, every 7th child born in Russia died from smallpox.

3.5 million Aztecs were killed by smallpox brought by the Europeans when Cortes (Cortez) found Mexico.

Smallpox has been around since at least 3000 years ago. Now, think about this. By your logic, all those people who were continually exposed to smallpox should have become immune to it and therefore smallpox should not be killing all these people. But that's not what happens. Why?

Because just being around sick people doesn't give you immunity.

Do you even know how a vaccine works? It provokes a reaction in your body just enough so that when you are exposed to a disease (exposed meaning when you inhale a germ which would make you sick and NOT when you sit in a group of other sick people without becoming ill), your body's immune system will then recognize that disease the next time you become infected and takes care of it without you getting sick.

When Jenner made his first vaccine he used cowpox, which was far less lethal than smallpox, but similar enough to make the body think you had smallpox. That cowpox provoked a reaction in people's immune system, so the next time smallpox came around, their bodies recognized it and dealt with it, and the people didn't get smallpox and didn't die.

You don't become immune by being around sick people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
Yet this is not proven scientifically... yet you continue to claim it... WHY?
It IS scientifically proven! Sheesh!



Moderator cut: personal - off topic



Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri View Post
Forcing those people out of school who are not vaccinated or under vaccinated will not end your interactions with them. You'll still have contact with "those kids" at your local grocery store, library, parks and rec center, neighborhood pool, restaurants, afterschool activities such as sports, art, music, camps, museums, parks, etc. This law is not going to make you safer.
But if all those kids were vaccinated, now that's something we wouldn't even have to worry about, would we?

However, not too many parents are able to homeschool. The hope isn't to force those kids out of school, it's to have them vaccinated, for their safety and everyone else's.

But you're right, there are parents who won't vaccinate and will continue to let their sick kids infect other people who may die as a result. You know what we call those parents? Well, I was going to say murderers, but selfish will do.

Last edited by Marka; 08-01-2015 at 05:15 AM..
 
Old 08-01-2015, 01:49 AM
 
Location: England
3,242 posts, read 3,023,371 times
Reputation: 3182
No other first world country has a problem with vaccination, so why the US? People who have problems with vaccination usually live in countries like Pakistan where there is currently a polio epidemic. But at least the Pakistani people have an excuse, most are illiterate and listen to groups like the Taliban who tell them that vaccination causes sterility.

What's Americas excuse?
 
Old 08-01-2015, 04:05 AM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,543 posts, read 26,155,710 times
Reputation: 26553
Quote:
Originally Posted by albion View Post
No other first world country has a problem with vaccination, so why the US? People who have problems with vaccination usually live in countries like Pakistan where there is currently a polio epidemic. But at least the Pakistani people have an excuse, most are illiterate and listen to groups like the Taliban who tell them that vaccination causes sterility.

What's Americas excuse?
The UK gave us Andrew Wakefield, and the damage he did was not confined to the US:

https://publichealthmatters.blog.gov...ating-measles/

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...d-2013-to-2014

Anti-vaxxers have revived measles in the US, but what about the UK?
 
Old 08-01-2015, 06:27 AM
 
5,660 posts, read 3,204,284 times
Reputation: 6638
Quote:
Originally Posted by kayanne View Post
Some on your list DO require vaccinations, at least in some areas (camps, sports). Others on your list don't involve daily close contact like public school does. At school, kids can be within inches of each other if they are lab partners, are sharing music in school choir, are wrestling in gym class, or just sitting next to each other in the school cafeteria. You tried really hard to come up with a long list of places for possible exposure, but children aren't normally within inches of each other at a restaurant, grocery store, library, etc., and certainly not for prolonged periods of time 5 days a week.
Disney is the perfect example. Were these children and adults who caught measles there 5 days a week in close contact? Second, only vaccinated children from California's public schools will be going to Disney? Does the rest of the country or foreign countries have this California law? Have you ever been to Orlando's(Disney World) airport? Children not coming into close contact with each other standing on very long tightly packed Security lines? You simply cannot imagine the number of children there are at that airport. The TSA does not check vaccination records. How about on the plane? No close contact?

My kids played high level travel sports. A simple physical was required, but NOT their vaccination records. Travel sports do not involve the public schools at all. They can have kids from public schools, private schools, and yep, homeschools. When they go to tournaments, they go OUT OF STATE. Hello, California? Mine have played other teams from all over the country, and including Canada, Mexico, and Ireland. Can say CONTACT sports??? Changing together in locker rooms????? Absolutely, they could come into very close contact with an unvaccinated player from another state, or country.

You absolutely will never know what child or adult is among you who has not been vaccinated or undervaccinated. That Disney Measles outbreak proves disease can spread not only in a classroom.
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.


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