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.
The reason there would ever be a mandate for, say, 7th graders, would be that they are a vulnerable population, not because anyone believes they're going to pick up HPV in math class by sharing a book.
The flu CAN be very dangerous. Every time it's not, that's awesome. Even if it's not serious, it usually means a lot of lost time, lost productivity. Illness impacts the bottom line. There are so many more considerations than "that one time I (or my daughter or my cousin or...) got it & it was no big deal."
And when the pool of vaccinated people increases, it's harder for an illness to spread. Conversely, when the pool of unvaccinated people is larger, it's easier for an illness to spread. Funny how that works.
Morbidity from VPD (vs. mortality) is often ignored by the anti-vaccination movement.
Ms. Teri indicated she kept a sick child with the flu home for a week from school. I was forced to do something similar with my children. I was forced to miss a couple of days of work as well. This is very rare for me. I won't get into details, but missing a day of work for me is more expensive than most people can imagine. I've probably missed a total of five scheduled days of work over about a ten year period. I've even gone to work with kidney stones bothering me because the alternative of not going to work was worse. What kidney stones couldn't do, the flu could.
In other posts on this topic, I've mentioned missing a week of school as a child because of the mumps. A friend of mine ended up in the hospital because of that disease.
The whole point is that even though these diseases are quite unlikely to kill most people it doesn't mean they aren't worth preventing. The economic cost of these contagious diseases needs to be factored into it as well. If every child in the school misses one week of school in a year, the economic loss to the school district, the taxpayers is substantial. If every adult worker loses 3 to 5 working days to the flu or some other disease, the loss to GDP is substantial. Medical and hospital expenses required to treat such diseases are quite significant. Economic losses from VPD are substantial and alone justify the cost of the vaccine and the effort involved in getting 90% to 95% of the population vaccinated. Additionally, some complications from these diseases do cause permanent impairment.
I wish anti-vaxxers would stop trying to make these diseases seem inconsequential. They are consequential in terms of time off work, time off school, medical treatment expenses, and permanent issues that afflict some who have had the diseases.
The article I'm quoting below from 2009, states that vaccination saves $13.5 billion per year in direct costs and $88 billion per year in indirect costs.
I wish that pro-mandaters would stop making light of the potential side effects. Japan halted HPV vaccinations in 2013 so that they could fully investigate the reported side effects that are ignored in our country. They have yet to re-instate it. They also don't mandate flu, chicken pox, mumps or rotavirus. The HPV vaccine is currently under investigation in Europe. Here in the US we add it to the "required" list and people cheer. Go figure.
Last edited by MissTerri; 08-01-2015 at 04:36 PM..
The article I'm quoting below from 2009, states that vaccination saves $13.5 billion per year in direct costs and $88 billion per year in indirect costs.
Shall we also mandate things like breastfeeding? That would save lives and billions of dollars as well. .
Quote:
If most new moms would breastfeed their babies for the first six months of life, it would save nearly 1,000 lives and billions of dollars each year. <snip>The US incurs $13 billion in excess costs annually and suffers 911 preventable deaths per year because our breastfeeding rates fall below recommended levels.
Since there is no financial incentive for any industry in more women breastfeeding, I doubt that will ever happen. Formula makers would lobby hard against it. In the case of vaccines, industry supports intervention with their products and has the money to lobby for new mandates. It's a very biased system when it comes to making healthcare decisions for all. Very biased. Lives and money only seem to be important in terms of saving when there is money to be gained.
Imagine if we banned cigarettes, alcohol and sugar? How many lives and how much money would be saved?
Last edited by MissTerri; 08-01-2015 at 04:45 PM..
I wish that pro-mandaters would stop making light of the potential side effects. Japan halted HPV vaccinations in 2013 so that they could fully investigate the reported side effects that are ignored in our country. They have yet to re-instate it. They also don't mandate flu, chicken pox, mumps or rotavirus. The HPV vaccine is currently under investigation in Europe. Here in the US we add it to the "required" list and people cheer. Go figure.
Well, it's on a list dated April 2014. Is 2014 after 2013? If so, perhaps they investigated and determined it's safe?
According to their vaccine schedule that I shared, it's still suspended. According to other sources, a deadline for a decision on whether to keep the suspension or not was set for April 2014 and that deadline came and went without a decision.
So you are saying that when our vaccination rate goes up, our cases of measles will follow? That is what is happening in Sudan. Vaccinations rate has been steadily rising in Sudan and currently stands at 85%. Measles cases are rising too it seems.
Last edited by MissTerri; 08-01-2015 at 05:28 PM..
I meant exactly what I said. It's a pretty straight forward response to an incorrect statement. If you want to read more into it and argue with me when I tell you that you are then I suppose that's fine. Carry on.
Again you refuse to clarify what you mean and supply evidence to support your opinion. We understand. You have no evidence. Carry on.
Quote:
Regarding healthy children and the flu. It's extremely rare for them to suffer serious complications. To suggest otherwise is disingenuous. I wouldn't feed a healthy three month old supplements and herbal antivirals but I would eat them myself while breastfeeding my three month old.
Complications from flu are not extremely rare when we have already had 144 pediatric deaths from the disease this year. There may be more when the new season starts in a few weeks. That does not count seriously ill children who were hospitalized but survived.
What evidence do you have that you could eat anything that would treat flu in a breast feeding baby? What if your baby is so ill he cannot nurse?
Quote:
The blogs that you continually share are packed full of propaganda. People can decide for themselves what the goal of the authors are. My opinion based on their inflammatory, mocking language and incredibly biased information is that they are not just genuine posters concerned about health. But hey, if you feel that getting your information from blog posts makes you a top notch scientist and that in turn makes you feel superior then by all means, do that.
Please give an example of "biased information" in anything I have posted. Are some of the people I link to extremely sarcastic? Yes. But you know what? They do a fine job of demolishing anti-vaccine pseudoscientific garbage. The sarcasm derives from their ability to see right through the anti-vax nonsense.
In addition, I post information from tons of primary sources. The few primary sources you have used in general do not say what you think they say, such as your claim that the risk of an abnormal Pap smear is only 6%. You misinterpreted that figure, ignoring that the cumulative risk of having an abnormal pap is 20 to 25%, and ignore the recommendation in your own source to vaccinate against HPV.
I never claim to be a "top notch scientist." I do know how to read and interpret scientific articles, though, and how to judge the quality of those studies. The cumulative evidence in those articles is that vaccines are safe and effective. The flu vaccine is indeed less effective than most; we hope for a good match, and we take the protection we can get. Less effective does not mean worthless. The HPV vaccine is pushing 100% effective when given before the recipient has any sexual experience at all, and despite your reliance on internet stories, close surveillance for serious adverse effects from the HPV vaccine shows those are pushing zero.
Quote:
If I'm a "science denier" then you are a "science abuser". My discussion regarding HPV is relevant to this conversation surrounding mandates.
You deny the total burden of disease caused by HPV, deny its effectiveness, and use internet stories as your "science". Sounds like denial to me.
Quote:
Vaccine mandates are not needed. The number of people who choose not to vaccinate for everything on the schedule is small. Clearly, adding HPV to the list of mandates discredits the argument that the mandates are needed to protect vulnerable children in the classroom. This is not about health.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
Even if teens are "vulnerable" how can one justify barring entrance to school without the vaccine? What is the reason for that? The unvaccinated for HPV teen is not putting your vaccinated child in danger as they sit next to one another in school. There is absolutely no reason why they cannot attend school with the HPV vaccine.
Mandates are needed because we have clusters of unvaccinated people that increase the risk of large outbreaks of vaccine preventable diseases.
The health authorities in Rhode Island have decided that the HPV vaccine is effective and safe and that the safety justifies including it on the schedule for their students.
Quote:
In the vast majority of cases, flu is not dangerous. The "bottom line" is not a strong reason for mandates.
In a significant number of cases influenza causes severe disease. Deaths are not rare. Flu is not dangerous ... until it is.
Quote:
We already have high rates of vaccination. Trying to catch everyone in the net is overkill.
There are areas in this country with vaccination rates lower than the poorest countries on the planet, largely due to parents who have the same philosophy that you do. Blame those parents for the mandates. The more you try to convince people not to vaccinate, the more you contribute to the problem.
As "Dr. Bob" Sears warns his patients, do not tell anyone else you do not vaccinate, because when others follow your lead herd immunity fails and you can no longer count on it to protect your child.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Potatooo
Why does everyone like to completely deny the link between vaccines and autism? It's not just the wakefield study folks, there's thousands supports this theory. I have severe autism myself and I truly believe if I would not have been vaccinated I wouldn't have to suffer with this terrible condition.
Do the right thing and fight against government mandated vaccines!!
Thw weight of the evidence tells us that vaccines do not cause autism. Your brain just is wired differently. Blaming your condition on vaccines is counterproductive. You would do better finding someone to help you maximize your potential, because while autism can certainly cause problems, those with it often have gifts, too. Find your gifts and build on them.
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.
