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.
Location: Subconscious Syncope, USA (Northeastern US)
2,365 posts, read 2,147,009 times
Reputation: 3814
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010
The Catholic Church clearly supports vaccination. For a Catholic to say vaccination is against his religion is clearly wrong. The quote I gave you states that the benefit to your child, public health, and the community favors vaccination.
If flu were to disappear, doctors would do what they have done with other diseases that have been eliminated: learn about them. They do that with measles.
We count on herd effect to protect those who cannot be vaccinated because that is all they have. The more people who are vaccinated, the lower the risk that an unvaccinated person will encounter a person with a vaccine preventable disease. It is simple math, really. Also, people with medical contraindications to vaccination commonly live in a home where everyone else is vaccinated, with fewer people to give a disease to.
The only money I make from vaccines is the small award I received for writing here. You have not demonstrated that anything I say is not true.
Courts have upheld the constitutionality of vaccine mandates. Your right not to vaccinate does not trump the right of the rest of us to stay healthy. If your choice will harm others, it may be restricted.
People do not have the right to choices that may harm other people. Choices get restricted in this country every day. You cannot drive the wrong way down the freeway. You cannot libel or slander someone.
No one will be handcuffed and forced to vaccinate. If they vaccinate because of the mandate, they really do not have a strong belief against vaccination
You say the community favors. Does any Roman Catholic remember recieving an official Church poll? Nope.
Even if certain people do favor, that does not equal an official mandate of the church. You cannot define what someone, even a Roman Catholic, is using your own perception and glossary of terms. But, I have no doubt you will still try. It seems to be your mandated job.
Once again, hasta la vista. Have a nice day!
We determined long ago in Roe V Wade that a woman is in charge of her own body. I elect to remain in charge of my own mind body and soul. I would assume you will be doing the same.
Last edited by ConeyGirl52; 06-07-2015 at 08:57 AM..
Besides the facts look fishy to some people and I can see why.
Fact: We are a for profit heathcare system
These vaccines are produced by a for profit corporation
This corporation threatened to forgo production of this product without mandated amounts
This corporation has been exempted from responsibility for injuries
Massive reports of injury and death reported against this company has been deemed un associated by an investigation team that aids this corporation by mandating their products
PDUFA is set up to receive millions of dollars from drug companies in order to get them approved faster, which mimics a private business deal yet it's actually the drug companies paying the government to speed things up.
And now its fact that this government agency that a lines itself with this for prot corporation mandates, forces the consumption of it's products by threatening to remove childrens right to a public education if they refuse their recommendations.
I am not a huge fan of our current health care system. Anyone who has read my posts on the Health Insurance Forum knows that.
It doesn't change the fact though that virtually everything in America is privately owned. If you want to buy a bicycle, an automobile, new shoes, or groceries you will be dealing with private business. Even public utilities in America are privately owned. The difference is that they enjoy monopoly status granted them by the state for specific policy reasons. As a lawyer, I even have to pay a private access company to file legal pleadings with the courts in my state over the internet.
One irony for me is that anti-vaccination and pro-choice people are always demanding a choice. If pharmaceutical companies were all owned by the state there would be no choice. Do you want to eliminate private production of pharmaceuticals and eliminate consumer choice? What alternatives do you see to our current system?
The important thing is not whether companies are privately owned. The important thing is that regulation of new medicines be vigorous and thorough. In other posts, I have gone into depth to explain what is required to get FDA approval for a new drug that someone wants to bring to market. In the cases of vaccines, approval of the ACIP of the CDC is necessary to add a vaccine to the vaccine recommendations. Its a process that is anything, but easy and its costs millions of dollars to bring a new vaccine to market. Our system for regulating drugs and medicines and thereby creating a huge degree of product safety is the envy of much of the world.
Finally, its not the companies that are trying "force consumption" of their product. Its teachers, educators, parents who vaccinate, and the medical community that are behind compulsory vaccination laws.
I'm not going to change your ideas about choice. However, I really wish you would rethink some of your premises. They are mistaken.
You continue to disregard the fact that a Catholic does not necessarily have to agree with how the Catholic church interprets every little detail of the bible.
This is completely different. There is no way of knowing if an unvaccinated or a vaccinated child will become contagious and pass on an illness to another and actually cause someone harm. Illness is a part of life. Even with 100% vaccine compliance from every single person, we would still have people getting sick and some of those people getting sick would still be getting sick from VPD. People would still die. This mandate also involves coercing people into injecting things into their body that may do harm tot her bodies or to their immune systems. It goes too far.
Will you hold vaccinated individuals who spread disease accountable?
Coercion. Some people will have to choose between putting food on the table and paying their rent (working) or their beliefs about vaccination (homeschooling).
We are already seeing this. Not only unvaccinated children being denied a public education, but nurses losing their jobs for refusing flu shots or even being allowed an accommodation such as wearing a mask.
This is now spreading by the number of new legislative attempts mandating those in more occupations; day care employees (California) and public school teachers (Vermont). Get all your vaccinations (no non-medical exemptions), or get fired. In legal jargon this is called "opening the door" by setting legal precedence. If some occupations can mandate vaccinations, then all occupations can. Miss Terri, that is coercion, as you said. Live and beg on the streets for food (consequences as some say?), or COMPLY with the vaccination schedule to be able to be employed?
Health Care Professionals if that were ever attempted on adults, you most certainly would see a huge backlash. Adult Americans like their freedoms too much for those kinds of "consequences".
I am not a huge fan of our current health care system. Anyone who has read my posts on the Health Insurance Forum knows that.
It doesn't change the fact though that virtually everything in America is privately owned. If you want to buy a bicycle, an automobile, new shoes, or groceries you will be dealing with private business. Even public utilities in America are privately owned. The difference is that they enjoy monopoly status granted them by the state for specific policy reasons. As a lawyer, I even have to pay a private access company to file legal pleadings with the courts in my state over the internet.
One irony for me is that anti-vaccination and pro-choice people are always demanding a choice. If pharmaceutical companies were all owned by the state there would be no choice. Do you want to eliminate private production of pharmaceuticals and eliminate consumer choice? What alternatives do you see to our current system?
The important thing is not whether companies are privately owned. The important thing is that regulation of new medicines be vigorous and thorough. In other posts, I have gone into depth to explain what is required to get FDA approval for a new drug that someone wants to bring to market. In the cases of vaccines, approval of the ACIP of the CDC is necessary to add a vaccine to the vaccine recommendations. Its a process that is anything, but easy and its costs millions of dollars to bring a new vaccine to market. Our system for regulating drugs and medicines and thereby creating a huge degree of product safety is the envy of much of the world.
Finally, its not the companies that are trying "force consumption" of their product. Its teachers, educators, parents who vaccinate, and the medical community that are behind compulsory vaccination laws.
I'm not going to change your ideas about choice. However, I really wish you would rethink some of your premises. They are mistaken.
Where do you think these corporations get those millions of dollars to fund research for new drugs or vaccines? Do you really think pharms are funding all this R&D themselves? Government Grants. Google it and you can get government sites and see what kind of research the government is funding, and how much, lately. Different pharmaceuticals compete with each other for these government grants. They have to submit pages of research they have done and why they should be awarding the grant over a competitor.
This is sounding a lot like an advertisement in favor of vaccines. If you want to live in fear of these illnesses, feel free. I will not. You said those who were not afraid probably had never seen them. I was just letting you know that I experienced those three first hand and I have zero fear of them.
I feel the same. While I was under 2 and don't remember most of them myself (not hospitalized even as an infant), I certainly remember other kids, and my own, with measles, mumps, german measles, scarlet fever, and chicken pox. I even remember a couple of kids who had whooping cough when that vaccine was already available. Flu???? Norovirus????? They must be joking with those. Promoting as much fear as possible among the public for compliance. It drives me totally up the wall at my age when they attempt to compare something like measles, mumps, or chicken pox with small pox, polio, or the PLAGUE. Children were not put in IRON LUNGS from Measles. Geesch.
I do not want medicine, or government, to take away our rights to refuse medical TREATMENTS, of which vaccinations are just one form of a TREATMENT.
You have not died from flu. Each year thousands of people, including well nourished, healthy people die from flu. That includes children and pregnant women.
Before the chickenpox vaccine, people died from chickenpox.
Before the rotavirus vaccine, babies (mostly) died from rotavirus.
With the vaccines for those, deaths decreased precipitously, and many fewer people get sick.
You are not the only person in the world. Many, many people do not have the same experience you did with those diseases.
The MAJORITY did not die, and most especially from chicken pox. I guess those were saved by being hospitalized in Iron Lungs for chicken pox back in those by gone days.
My own daughter (11) thought it was very funny to try to eat the oatmeal in her Aveeno bath. Stop it!!!! Don't you know how serious this is? You could be DEAD!
I am not a huge fan of our current health care system. Anyone who has read my posts on the Health Insurance Forum knows that.
It doesn't change the fact though that virtually everything in America is privately owned. If you want to buy a bicycle, an automobile, new shoes, or groceries you will be dealing with private business. Even public utilities in America are privately owned. The difference is that they enjoy monopoly status granted them by the state for specific policy reasons. As a lawyer, I even have to pay a private access company to file legal pleadings with the courts in my state over the internet.
One irony for me is that anti-vaccination and pro-choice people are always demanding a choice. If pharmaceutical companies were all owned by the state there would be no choice. Do you want to eliminate private production of pharmaceuticals and eliminate consumer choice? What alternatives do you see to our current system?
The important thing is not whether companies are privately owned. The important thing is that regulation of new medicines be vigorous and thorough. In other posts, I have gone into depth to explain what is required to get FDA approval for a new drug that someone wants to bring to market. In the cases of vaccines, approval of the ACIP of the CDC is necessary to add a vaccine to the vaccine recommendations. Its a process that is anything, but easy and its costs millions of dollars to bring a new vaccine to market. Our system for regulating drugs and medicines and thereby creating a huge degree of product safety is the envy of much of the world.
Finally, its not the companies that are trying "force consumption" of their product. Its teachers, educators, parents who vaccinate, and the medical community that are behind compulsory vaccination laws.
I'm not going to change your ideas about choice. However, I really wish you would rethink some of your premises. They are mistaken.
I actually understand what you're saying, and my reasons for wanting a better approach involving choice is not fueled by my opposition to vaccines, but my concern that this approach will do more harm than good. I'm not alone in this, several doctors have blogged this concern as well. With schools and doctors turning away a segment of the population those turned away won't easily give up their beliefs to join the majority, they will usually fight harder. Those who simply didn't want one or two of the recommended vaccines are already stating they will now get none because they are feeling forced by a for profit system to make choices they don't feel comfortable about.
Not to mention, with these mandates we are making small clusters of unvaccinated into to larger clusters of unvaccinated.
As a lawyer, I'm sure you are aware this mandate will open new cases against the state for vaccine injuries that were in part due to a vaccinated people who felt threatened into accepting it. The governments attachment to this issue will only create new avenues.
Having a non profit healthcare system would remove the motive for profit when making public health decisions for the public.
Everyone in our system is well aware that profit is the bottom line for the corporate world. Corporations involved in our healthcare system make millions of dollars. Drug companies make more in America than anywhere else in the world because they are allowed to in a for profit healthcare system. This creates a lack of trust. It's also created many medical mistakes, lawsuits, and public numbers that rival cancer for death rates in this country.
This fuels a distrust about the true intent of mandates, and trusting the CDC. Especially given the ratio of complaints and death about vaccines to the actual number of injuries and deaths that are rewarded with validity. This also raises suspicion. People don't feel in touch with the very people we ask them to trust, even if they do vaccinate. So, people are out there in large numbers trying to tell the public their story. It causes fear and frustration for parents. Mandating with this climate will cause mini wars, as it has already. Regarding California and it's new exemption refusal many parent groups are having heated debates involving threats. It's a sensitive subject.
Again, incentives and educational programs aimed at encouraging vaccines, and removing the stigma that the CDC covers up injury complaints would be better, IMO of course. If these people are indeed afraid, it makes more sense to work on lessoning the fear that stops them from vaccinating instead of fueling it with mandates to me.
I think we are setting up a scenario that will turn off more people to vaccines, not encourage them. I think a more transparent record of injury and death reports help. If people who are pro vaccination would address the discrepancy in injury reporting and understand how 30,000 a year dwindled down to a few seems like strange odds when you do the math that would also help. It seems like they are being asked to take a momentary risk with no recourse and no understanding if they end up suffering an injury.
Most parents are just concerned for their kids just like the other side. Calling them stupid, baby killers, fear stricken lunatics who need mandates because they are just lazy with no conviction as Suzy stated just adds to the trust issues. It also creates a war like atmosphere that might encourage those on the fence to turn the opposite of what we want.
I am concerned about these mandates at the state level. In all fairness, a state or two could capitalize on peoples freedom of choice being safe in their state which could mean a un proportional amount of unvaccinated people in one state or the other. Arizona does just that regarding gun ownership laws.
That could create more of a transmission problem then what we have now. The same with doctors who refuse those who don't vaccinate, there will always be a doctor willing to capitalize on this waiting next door in a for proit system. Then we will have a large amount of unvaccinated in one doctors office just ripe for an outbreak. Large amounts of unvaccinated in homeschool playgroups taking field trips, etc. Unless they will be actually eliminated from our society or the mandates will be done to keep your citizenship here I don't see this as any kind of solution to help stop transmission. I do see it as a way to get a few more vaccines sold.
My reasoning is not because I feel vaccines don't work, and I accept they could cause harm (more than is reported by the CDC I might add but less than the majority of reports, I stick with the probability of 30000 and go with that) but still had my kids vaccinated for most childhood diseases. But, I had that choice to make knowing that I would be responsible if my kids got the illnesses. I did not make it based on the premise that a school was threatening me into it.
That would have made me more suspicious, not less. I question what the real goal is because there is no pandemic, yet we are using that act to promote mandates which trump the right to an education act. This adds to my suspicion.
The public knowledge that those who make vaccines threatened to stop making vaccines because of the numbers, raises suspicion. In a non profit healthcare this doesn't happen. They don't make a profit selling to England or other non profit healthcare systems in Europe, they come here for the profit. England doesn't have to mandate because people trust a non profit system more(it's called the peoples government for a reason), even still some choose not to vaccinate but herd takes care of it for the most part.
My approach would be working on creating more trust, not creating more fear with mandating. If fear is the issue then we should approach it with a program to eliminate fear, not create more. Every time we make fun of or light of someones real fear of vaccination we just instill more fear and increase their lack of trust. I don't see how this is a good thing, I really don't.
Sorry this is long winded
Last edited by PoppySead; 06-07-2015 at 10:19 AM..
You say the community favors. Does any Roman Catholic remember recieving an official Church poll? Nope.
Even if certain people do favor, that does not equal an official mandate of the church. You cannot define what someone, even a Roman Catholic, is using your own perception and glossary of terms. But, I have no doubt you will still try. It seems to be your mandated job.
Once again, hasta la vista. Have a nice day!
We determined long ago in Roe V Wade that a woman is in charge of her own body. I elect to remain in charge of my own mind body and soul. I would assume you will be doing the same.
The authority of the Pope is absolute, and he says it's OK to use these vaccines. FAQ - Vaccine Use - The National Catholic Bioethics Center "A statement from the Pontifical Academy for Life issued in 2005 holds that one may use these products, despite their distant association with abortion, at least until such time as new vaccines become available." (Emphasis mine)
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.
Children were not put in IRON LUNGS from Measles. Geesch. 