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 08-06-2015, 11:41 AM
 
8,336 posts, read 8,615,198 times
Reputation: 26050

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri View Post
I did the vast majority of my research years ago. I read tons of studies and the vast majority was from sources that you would approve of. The info was for me so I had no reason to save it or bookmark it. I made my decisions based on a ton of different pieces of information and after talking to several doctors, one naturopath and one chiropractor (sorry you don't believe in them, I do). I also looked into issues surrounding nutrition and illness. Lessing complications with herbs, food, etc. (again sorry you don't believe in that, I do). The info is out there and available to anyone who wishes to take the time to take an objective view on the issue. I have no desire or need to go back and find all of the info and compile it all for you now. There are risks to vaccinating and there are risks to not vaccination. Some vaccines make more sense then others. Neither decision is wrong and neither decision is easy.
Thank you. You can't and won't answer three highly relevant questions. We, who support vaccination, have spent hours on this thread citing medical journal articles, studies, and statements from the CDC. You do nothing, but sit here trying desperately to poke tiny holes in all of this. Anybody who has read this thread understands that by now. Comments like "vaccines are not 100% safe" are silly. Taking a bath isn't 100% safe. Plenty of people are injured falling in their shower. Not taking vaccines based on a statement like that makes as much sense as telling people to stop taking showers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
Compromise as in not all vaccines? Not possible. Move to another state? Really? And this is not coercion or even force? When one choice becomes a burden then you are forced to chose the other. Is that true choice?
I have news for you. The real reason government exists is because coercion is needed to accomplish some purposes in our society. Coercion is needed to stop some people from victimizing others. Its needed to collect taxes to run government. Its needed to keep people from committing crimes. Its needed to make business behave ethically. The USA doesn't run on a libertarian or laisse faire model. The freedoms granted in our Constitution are set up to balance public interest against individual rights. There is a strong public interest in preventing the spread of infectious diseases. Hence, the courts have always upheld compulsory vaccination laws when that question has been put to them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead View Post
Wow, now not vaccinating is akin to murder?

More kids die from getting a ride to school than walking, shall we mandate walking to school? Mandate Ritalin for those with ADHD?
Mandate all stay home until completely free of flu symptoms? Stomach viruses? That would be a lot of missed school but would be safer for those around school with Asthma or other issues that a cold or flu would aggravate.

How far we going to go with mandates? You people act like thousands of kids have been dying of Measles all around you. None have for years. Most people vaccinate. Outbreaks will happen regardless in CA because we have a lot of foreign travelers. Sometimes that's just life.

But what has changed is that vaccine makers are asking for incentives to making vaccines. Well, I guess they got what they paid for after paying the government of CA. Mandated capitalism in a for profit healthcare system. Just wait, it will hit everyone, not just those kids who don't want a shot. You'll get what you ask for soon enough. Adult mandates are just around the bend. I can't wait to see how willing all the adults are to have mandates imposed on them or they can just lose their jobs or get arrested. I think the tone will change soon.

Time will tell. I'll be watching from Arizona.
As has been said numerous times in this thread, no activity is a 100% safe. Many people die or are badly injured falling in their bathrooms. Mandates for vaccinations are different than a mandate to take ritalin because childhood vaccines are given to prevent infectious diseases which can spread to an entire community. You can rant all day long about the "for profit" health care system. What in America is not-for-profit? Like it or not, we have a capitalist system and the people who work in that sector of our economy are as entitled to be paid as anyone else. The compromise we have struck is that pharmaceutical industry is heavily regulated. You seem to think that the regulation in place is not sufficient. I have news for you. Another equally large group is angry that there is too much regulation and there is a lag getting effective drugs and medicines to market.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyborgt800 View Post
I wonder if in 50, 100 or 500 years those people will look back on us and laugh that we thought pumping ourselves full of junk would make us immune for diseases...just as we laugh at bloodletting. Bloodletting was the cure that doctors and scientists proclaimed as FACT to the masses!

Scientist used to say that a Brachiosaur was FACT!

Science used to say the universe was a constant.

http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0...ienceworks_20y
Your link doesn't work. More importantly, your argument doesn't either. Cite respectable sources that actually deal with vaccines here if you expect anyone to pay attention to you.



Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead View Post
They can't even link injuries they award money for. They pay without being capable of showing cause. They have no idea if vaccines cause these reported injuries or not because they aren't that great at the science yet. Why would we mandate something we don't have the capability of determining effect from. STUPIDITY and it's just asking for trouble. It's not the first time drug companies ask for this kind of trouble and it sadly won't be the last.
Like I've stated, they just went through it with NSAIDS. It took long term real damage to humans before they believed the truth, they DO increase your risk of heart attacks and stroke, even at low dosages or first time users. I suspect one day we'll be smart enough to really know what injury and death vaccinations cause, but so far we just don't know. That's a lot different than proof it doesn't.
We have discussed the no-fault compensation system in place for vaccine injuries. This is something I want you to try and wrap your head around: The system that existed before the creation of the VCF in 1989 didn't work. It wasn't working for anyone including victims and most of the lawyers involved. When these cases came to trial in the tort system, the Plaintiffs lost virtually every case because they couldn't come up with the scientific testimony they needed to convince a jury that the vaccines were dangerous or defective. On the other hand, there were a handful of people who suffered allergic reactions to vaccines. The vaccine manufacturers could avoid liability for these injuries simply by handing everyone a disclaimer indicating that a few people who got the shot might suffer such a reaction. One great accomplishment of the VCF is that this group of people now receives compensation. These allergic reactions are the major injuries that people sought to address through a compensation system and now they are being addressed. You don't seem to understand what the real issues were with the old and new compensation systems.

Round and round we go. Where we stop, nobody knows....

Last edited by markg91359; 08-06-2015 at 11:58 AM..

 
Old 08-06-2015, 11:44 AM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
8,435 posts, read 8,401,265 times
Reputation: 1690
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
Just an FYI for all posters. The CA bill applies to daycare (private and public) so you can't send an unvaxxed kid there even if you needed too. In addition, the CA homeschool law is very strict so that most of the time parents opt to send their child part-time to a coop/charter schools. These are also included in the bill. There is the option to do online schooling, however the bill doesn't address it specifically so it could be mandated vaccination too.

The only true way to be exempt in CA is to homeschool yourself, however the law states that you must have a teaching degree. How many parents have one? Not many.
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
Apparently the law does not say that.

HomeSchool Association of CaliforniaLegal FAQ

"How do I go about homeschooling legally?
There are several exemptions from California's compulsory education law which provide homeschoolers with a variety of alternatives for homeschooling. You can:

*Establish a private school, which involves taking some simple steps. A teaching credential is not necessary. Once the school is established, file a private school affidavit form.
*Join a private school satellite program PSP, if it has filed its own private school affidavit in California. If it has not, then you must take all of the steps to establish your own private school and must file the private school affidavit.
*Join a public school ISP (Independent Study Program), in which case your child is enrolled in public school.
*Join a Charter School Homeschooling Program, in which case your child is enrolled in public school.
*Employ a credentialed tutor; or, if you have the appropriate credential, you may be the tutor yourself.

You may decide which option best satisfies the current needs of your family. As your needs change, you may choose to use a different option."

"Do I need a California Teaching Credential in order to teach my children at home?

When children are enrolled in some type of public program, their work is supervised by credentialed teachers. Most of the teaching, of course, is done at home, but parents do not need credentials themselves. Homeschooling parents who are using the private school option do not need a California teaching credential. The statute says, very plainly, that the teacher in a private school (meaning any private school, large or small) must be "capable of teaching". It is obviously a very vague requirement, but we generally believe that anyone of reasonable intelligence and mental health who can read and write in English, even if they do not have a high school or college degree, may be "capable of teaching." Many homeschool teachers attend education conferences, read educational materials, and locate the resources they need in order to meet the "capable of teaching" requirement. In fact, teachers in giant parochial high schools don't need to hold credentials, either. They have to be "capable of teaching," and it is left to the private school administrators and the schools' customers to decide if they are. However, if you are using the tutoring option, you must have a valid California teaching credential for the subjects and grade levels of children that you will be teaching."
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
Private schools are included in the bill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tlvancouver View Post
We know, good thing too.
Keep up with the conversation. The ONLY way to be exempt from the mandate/bill is to truly homeschool which in CA means you have to have a teaching degree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tlvancouver View Post
They have "worked out what illnesses vaccines cause" - NONE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tlvancouver View Post
Repeat post. Nobody said they're 100% safe. 1 in a million severe adverse reactions from childhood vaccines. Whatever you do don't let your kid ride a bike, skateboard, play tennis, swim. The risks of ANY of those are exponentially higher, without the benefit of preventing deadly diseases.

Your choice though. Watch the lead in the pencils when you're homeschooling
you persist in saying that homeschooling is a valid choice if you don't want to vaccinate yet it has been shown that the ONLY way a parent can truly be exempt in CA is if they homeschool with a teaching degree. Sure... plenty of parents are going to run out to get their teaching degree so their kids can be exempt.

This is called force by coercion. Make it impossible to choose one option so they are FORCED to choose the other.

Then you say that the illness vaccines cause are NONE, yet next you admit there are SOME?
 
Old 08-06-2015, 11:50 AM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
8,435 posts, read 8,401,265 times
Reputation: 1690
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
Thank you. You can't and won't answer three highly relevant questions. We, who support vaccination, have spent hours on this thread citing medical journal articles, studies, and statements from the CDC. You do nothing, but sit here trying desperately to poke tiny holes in all of this. Anybody who has read this thread understands that by now. Comments like "vaccines are not 100% safe" are silly. Taking a bath isn't 100% safe. Plenty of people are injured falling in their shower. Not taking vaccines based on a statement like that makes as much sense as telling people to stop taking showers.

I have news for you. The real reason government exists is because coercion is needed to accomplish some purposes in our society. Coercion is needed to stop some people from victimizing others. Its needed to collect taxes to run government. Its needed to keep people from committing crimes. Its needed to make business behave ethically. The USA doesn't run on a libertarian or laisse faire model. The freedoms granted in our Constitution are set up to balance public interest against individual rights. There is a strong public interest in preventing the spread of infectious diseases. Hence, the courts have always upheld compulsory vaccination laws when that question has been put to them.

As has been said numerous times in this thread, no activity is a 100% safe. Many people die or are badly injured falling in their bathrooms. Mandates for vaccinations are different than a mandate to take ritalin because childhood vaccines are given to prevent infectious diseases which can spread to an entire community. You can rant all day long about the "for profit" health care system. What in America is not-for-profit? Like it or not, we have a capitalist system and the people who work in that sector of our economy are as entitled to be paid as anyone else. The compromise we have struck is that pharmaceutical industry is heavily regulated. You seem to think that the regulation in place is not sufficient. I have news for you. Another equally larger group is angry that there is too much regulation and there is a lag getting effective drugs and medicines to market.

Your link doesn't work. More importantly, your argument doesn't either. Cite respectable sources that actually deal with vaccines here if you expect anyone to pay attention to you.

We have discussed the no-fault compensation system in place for vaccine injuries. This is something I want you to try and wrap your head around: The system that existed before the creation of the VCF in 1989 didn't work. It wasn't working for anyone including victims and most of the lawyers involved. When these cases came to trial in the tort system, the Plaintiffs lost virtually every case because they couldn't come up with the scientific testimony they needed to convince a jury that the vaccines were dangerous or defective. On the other hand, there were a handful of people who suffered allergic reactions to vaccines. The vaccine manufacturers could avoid liability for these injuries simply by handing everyone a disclaimer indicating that a few people who got the shot might suffer such a reaction. One great accomplishment of the VCF is that this group of people now receives compensation. These allergic reactions are the major injuries that people sought to address through a compensation system and now they are being addressed. You don't seem to understand what the real issues were with the old and new compensation systems.

Round and round we go. Where we stop, nobody knows....
Vaccinations are medicine given to a healthy individual not a bath. Yes we all take risks however, we expect freedom of choice when in comes to injecting substances into our bodies as a medical intervention. Your analogies are inadequate.
 
Old 08-06-2015, 11:55 AM
 
Location: BC, Arizona
1,170 posts, read 750,306 times
Reputation: 2377
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
Keep up with the conversation. The ONLY way to be exempt from the mandate/bill is to truly homeschool which in CA means you have to have a teaching degree.


you persist in saying that homeschooling is a valid choice if you don't want to vaccinate yet it has been shown that the ONLY way a parent can truly be exempt in CA is if they homeschool with a teaching degree. Sure... plenty of parents are going to run out to get their teaching degree so their kids can be exempt.

This is called force by coercion. Make it impossible to choose one option so they are FORCED to choose the other.

Then you say that the illness vaccines cause are NONE, yet next you admit there are SOME?
Please ask someone sitting beside you to help you comprehend your own links. Parents can homeschool without a credential. Can you not read that in your own post. I pity your homeschooled kid

Since you can't make your point, please don't try to help me with mine - that's not what I said, you either know that and are deliberately mischaracterizing my post or you truly can't comprehend. A reaction is not an "illness" - since you're a "scientist" you must know that.

Keep talking about it being hard to homeschool, let me be clear:

I. DON'T. CARE.

Your point has been addressed at least 100 times (no exaggeration). Do you really think posting what you "think" (not supported by the law) the 101st time is going to make the overwhelming majority of society that support mandates and the legislators they elect from all major parties go "Well, since katonjj said so, it must be true"?

WE GET IT, YOU DON"T LIKE THE TRADE OFF OF VACCINE MANDATES AND HOMESCHOOLING. OKAY, YOU REALLY REALLY REALLY DON'T LIKE IT.

Still, it's coming into law, likely to spread, and has been established through the courts to be legal. You lose.
 
Old 08-06-2015, 12:11 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
8,435 posts, read 8,401,265 times
Reputation: 1690
Quote:
Originally Posted by tlvancouver View Post


Please ask someone sitting beside you to help you comprehend your own links. Parents can homeschool without a credential. Can you not read that in your own post. I pity your homeschooled kid

Since you can't make your point, please don't try to help me with mine - that's not what I said, you either know that and are deliberately mischaracterizing my post or you truly can't comprehend. A reaction is not an "illness" - since you're a "scientist" you must know that.

Keep talking about it being hard to homeschool, let me be clear:

I. DON'T. CARE.

Your point has been addressed at least 100 times (no exaggeration). Do you really think posting what you "think" (not supported by the law) the 101st time is going to make the overwhelming majority of society that support mandates and the legislators they elect from all major parties go "Well, since katonjj said so, it must be true"?

WE GET IT, YOU DON"T LIKE THE TRADE OFF OF VACCINE MANDATES AND HOMESCHOOLING. OKAY, YOU REALLY REALLY REALLY DON'T LIKE IT.

Still, it's coming into law, likely to spread, and has been established through the courts to be legal. You lose.
Are you playing dodge ball? If you don't like my posts... Don't respond. If you don't want to address your inconsistencies then don't. If you don't want to see my posts, click "ignore" but your disparaging remarks show a lack of conversation skills. This is not a debate. It is a discussion among adults. I've read the entire bill, have you? If not, you can read it here: Bill Text - SB-277 Public health: vaccinations.

We understand you don't care, but others do care. If you don't care... Why even discuss it?
 
Old 08-06-2015, 12:12 PM
 
5,673 posts, read 3,215,367 times
Reputation: 6656
Quote:
Originally Posted by tlvancouver View Post


Please ask someone sitting beside you to help you comprehend your own links. Parents can homeschool without a credential. Can you not read that in your own post. I pity your homeschooled kid

Since you can't make your point, please don't try to help me with mine - that's not what I said, you either know that and are deliberately mischaracterizing my post or you truly can't comprehend. A reaction is not an "illness" - since you're a "scientist" you must know that.

Keep talking about it being hard to homeschool, let me be clear:

I. DON'T. CARE.

Your point has been addressed at least 100 times (no exaggeration). Do you really think posting what you "think" (not supported by the law) the 101st time is going to make the overwhelming majority of society that support mandates and the legislators they elect from all major parties go "Well, since katonjj said so, it must be true"?

WE GET IT, YOU DON"T LIKE THE TRADE OFF OF VACCINE MANDATES AND HOMESCHOOLING. OKAY, YOU REALLY REALLY REALLY DON'T LIKE IT.

Still, it's coming into law, likely to spread, and has been established through the courts to be legal. You lose.
Spreading? Not by California's neighbors.


Bills banning most vaccine exemptions fail in Northwest
 
Old 08-06-2015, 12:16 PM
 
8,547 posts, read 5,285,381 times
Reputation: 9120
Quote:
Originally Posted by tlvancouver View Post
Anything you eat, drink or come in contact with would fail your test. Not a great way to go through life. Thinking there's a conspiracy doesn't make it true. We know unequivocally what they prevent and have thousands of studies that establish their safety, that's good enough for me. Cars kill thousands of people every day and yet most of us (the logical ones) still drive because the benefits outweigh the MUCH MORE significant risk than vaccinations cause. We get you don't understand that, frankly I don't care either way. I just hope more and more jurisdictions prevent unvaccinated kids from putting others at risk at school.



We know, good thing too.



Repeat post. Nobody said they're 100% safe. 1 in a million severe adverse reactions from childhood vaccines. Whatever you do don't let your kid ride a bike, skateboard, play tennis, swim. The risks of ANY of those are exponentially higher, without the benefit of preventing deadly diseases.

Your choice though. Watch the lead in the pencils when you're homeschooling
You are very misinformed.
 
Old 08-06-2015, 12:21 PM
 
Location: A place that's too cold
4,114 posts, read 4,071,143 times
Reputation: 10143
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
Thank you. You can't and won't answer three highly relevant questions. We, who support vaccination, have spent hours on this thread citing medical journal articles, studies, and statements from the CDC. You do nothing, but sit here trying desperately to poke tiny holes in all of this. Anybody who has read this thread understands that by now. Comments like "vaccines are not 100% safe" are silly. Taking a bath isn't 100% safe. Plenty of people are injured falling in their shower. Not taking vaccines based on a statement like that makes as much sense as telling people to stop taking showers.



I have news for you. The real reason government exists is because coercion is needed to accomplish some purposes in our society. Coercion is needed to stop some people from victimizing others. Its needed to collect taxes to run government. Its needed to keep people from committing crimes. Its needed to make business behave ethically. The USA doesn't run on a libertarian or laisse faire model. The freedoms granted in our Constitution are set up to balance public interest against individual rights. There is a strong public interest in preventing the spread of infectious diseases. Hence, the courts have always upheld compulsory vaccination laws when that question has been put to them.



As has been said numerous times in this thread, no activity is a 100% safe. Many people die or are badly injured falling in their bathrooms. Mandates for vaccinations are different than a mandate to take ritalin because childhood vaccines are given to prevent infectious diseases which can spread to an entire community. You can rant all day long about the "for profit" health care system. What in America is not-for-profit? Like it or not, we have a capitalist system and the people who work in that sector of our economy are as entitled to be paid as anyone else. The compromise we have struck is that pharmaceutical industry is heavily regulated. You seem to think that the regulation in place is not sufficient. I have news for you. Another equally large group is angry that there is too much regulation and there is a lag getting effective drugs and medicines to market.



Your link doesn't work. More importantly, your argument doesn't either. Cite respectable sources that actually deal with vaccines here if you expect anyone to pay attention to you.





We have discussed the no-fault compensation system in place for vaccine injuries. This is something I want you to try and wrap your head around: The system that existed before the creation of the VCF in 1989 didn't work. It wasn't working for anyone including victims and most of the lawyers involved. When these cases came to trial in the tort system, the Plaintiffs lost virtually every case because they couldn't come up with the scientific testimony they needed to convince a jury that the vaccines were dangerous or defective. On the other hand, there were a handful of people who suffered allergic reactions to vaccines. The vaccine manufacturers could avoid liability for these injuries simply by handing everyone a disclaimer indicating that a few people who got the shot might suffer such a reaction. One great accomplishment of the VCF is that this group of people now receives compensation. These allergic reactions are the major injuries that people sought to address through a compensation system and now they are being addressed. You don't seem to understand what the real issues were with the old and new compensation systems.

Round and round we go. Where we stop, nobody knows....
This is a very well-reasoned post in a sea of craziness! I particularly like what you said about coercion being necessary in various situations. A lot of semantical arguments have gone back and forth regarding these vac laws being a "choice" versus "coercion." Even though I am (in general) in favor of the mandates, I do agree with the posters who say they are more coercion than choice. But, unlike them, I agree with you that sometimes, coercion is needed for the overall good.

I also agree (who could possibly disagree?) that NOTHING in this world is 100% risk free. I don't understand how any rational person could view the minuscule risk of vaccinations as being a greater concern than the risks of the diseases they prevent.
 
Old 08-06-2015, 12:22 PM
 
Location: BC, Arizona
1,170 posts, read 750,306 times
Reputation: 2377
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
Are you playing dodge ball? If you don't like my posts... Don't respond. If you don't want to address your inconsistencies then don't. If you don't want to see my posts, click "ignore" but your disparaging remarks show a lack of conversation skills. This is not a debate. It is a discussion among adults. I've read the entire bill, have you? If not, you can read it here: Bill Text - SB-277 Public health: vaccinations.

We understand you don't care, but others do care. If you don't care... Why even discuss it?
I am very consistent. Vaccines are absolutely unequivocally scientifically proven to be exponentially safer than the miniscule risk of a severe adverse reaction. It's true, I don't "like" your posts, I think they're uninformed drivel wrapped in borrowed big words (hey, you asked). Ignore me if you like

I don't respect your views, the fact is that if you were actually believed and followed it creates risk to public health, so yes, I am disparaging them. Your "opinions" however strong, are not entitled to more respect than the factual and scientific foundation they're built on, which is absent.

The fact that people (notably Jenny McCarthy and her starbucks swilling posse) spewing false science about vaccines has led to a reduction in vaccination rates is why I ensure the facts are matched up against the anti-vax fiction. Preventing preventable childhood diseases through vaccines is worth the annoyance of conspiracy theories, "choice without consequence" fighters etc.

I'm very glad for childhood vaccine mandates that protect children while they're at school. I hope more and more states and provinces adopt them.

No dodge ball
 
Old 08-06-2015, 12:25 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,579 posts, read 26,222,559 times
Reputation: 26628
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri View Post
If this is the case then why wouldn't the focus be on making sure that those who are travelling abroad are vaccinated? Instead it's targeting a small percentage of school children.
I have repeatedly said I think that is a great idea. However, I am sure the anti-vax crowd would lobby vigorously against it because it would limit their choice to travel.

Meanwhile, it would be useful if returning Americans who are not vaccinated choose not to travel to areas where they can catch measles.

Measles: global update - Travel.gc.ca

Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead View Post
Exactly. That's a choice. Want to travel, get vaccinated. Foreign newcomers also bring them in. Both do. Why not change that? Because the drug companies haven't targeted it yet as a money maker. When they're done here maybe they'll start paying whoever is responsible large sums of money to do just that.
If it's a good idea, why would it bother you if drug companies lobby for it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead View Post
Since my child has it I'll tell you why. A lot of parents don't agree with medicating their child with a drug for something no medical expert has knowledge about. Doctors have no idea why my son has Tourettes, can't explain what it is. It's a medical mystery. Yet some teachers, doctors, and principals think they know the best way to treat it.
There is a great deal known about Tourette's, with the genetic basis for it being elucidated now that there are methods available to do so.

Insights into the genetic architecture of OCD, Tourette syndrome - Medical News Today

"An international research consortium led by investigators at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) and the University of Chicago has answered several questions about the genetic background of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and Tourette syndrome (TS), providing the first direct confirmation that both are highly heritable and also revealing major differences between the underlying genetic makeup of the disorders."

Quote:
So far, no expert can tell why VAERS gets so many injury and death reports surrounding vaccines. They cannot attribute the vaccine to any of it's reported injuries or deaths. That does not tell us that vaccines are safe, it tells us we still don't know what injuries they cause. Big difference. I don't think mandating something that isn't transparent is right to do. It's akin to mandating Ritilan for ADHD.
VAERS reports are not proof of causality. Large numbers of them are hearsay. The true serious complications of vaccines are known and well characterized. That is why people can get compensated if they experience them.

Quote:
When and if a scientist or medical professional can link what injuries are caused by vaccines and which are not come talk to me. So far they can't. It's just a guessing game. Not good enough for me. I can't believe the public majority would mandate something like this without good science behind it but, mandates aren't fueled by good science, they are fueled by profit. Yes, it's ok in our for profit medical system for drug companies to make money as some have stated earlier. Go ahead, but to mandate for profit, I'm not comfortable with that. I agree with the choice to vaccinate, but I don't agree to mandate for profit, that crosses a line I'm not comfortable with.
There is good science. You just choose not to believe it. The experts do know what adverse effects to expect from specific vaccines.

Australia has socialized medicine and vaccine mandates. "For profit" has nothing to do with it. In fact, if profit were the motivation, drug companies would stop making vaccines. There would be more profit for them in treating people who would then get sick.

Quote:
Mandating a vaccine will increase injury and death reports, it already has.
Reports are not proof of causality. True adverse effects of vaccines are so rare as to be almost uncountable.

Quote:
You can't mandate something that could possibly cause harm for the greater good. Is this a war on disease? With casualties expected? Do you get to make the choice on who's kid takes the hit for the greater good or do their parents? I guess you feel qualified to do this but I don't. If they feel cautious on vaccinating because they feel their kid might suffer bad effects then I'd gladly lend my herd immunity to them. They know their child, they might have had a bad first reaction or a sibling who's had one. It's should be up to them. IMO.
Mandating vaccines leads to less harm. It is specifically because vaccines are so safe that mandates are ethical. The risks of serious complications from the diseases that vaccines prevent is many orders of magnitude greater than the risks of vaccines themselves. A child who has actually had an adverse reaction to a vaccine will not be required to take it again. A reaction that a relative had would not be a contraindication to vaccination.

Quote:
I certainly with all good conscious can't tell a parent who's child got a life long injury or died from a vaccine that his kids bad luck was worth the herds immunity. I guess you can, but for me it would lack moral judgement to say my kids worth your kids death or injury.
What do you tell the parent whose child got a life long injury or died from a disease he caught from your unvaccinated child? Is your kid worth his kid's death or injury? That scenario will happen more often than the one you propose.

Quote:
I would rather educate and give the choice, so far that's working well enough and we have had little death or injury from childhood diseases.
Vaccination rates in some communities are so low that larger outbreaks have happened, traceable to those communities, over the last decade or so. Education is not working "well enough." That is the reason California passed its recent law.

Quote:
Until they work out what injuries vaccines actually cause and parents have a clear choice I cannot accept mandates as a good choice. With or without vaccines we will see death and illness from disease that's life but casualties from mandated medicine is a risk to solving a problem akin to making a bomb to evade war. It never saves more lives than it takes. That's not a good way to save our kids from injury and death, only a way to have a war with a disease. There is a difference. IMO>
The casualties you visualize from vaccines just do not exist. The casualties from the diseases they prevent are very real. Vaccines will not prevent all infectious disease, but they do prevent many that have a serious risk of morbidity and mortality, as long as enough people use them. That is not opinion; it's fact.
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