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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 03:36 PM
Status: "Spring has Sprung!" (set 18 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,343 posts, read 101,350,397 times
Reputation: 32752

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri View Post
It’s not my personal belief that vaccines are evil. Not sure why you would feel the need to say such a thing.

I’m talking about a parent who’s child has had a serious adverse reaction being denied a medical exemption because their reaction , no matter how serious does not fit what the ACIP deems as acceptable.

It seems likely to anyone paying attention that if this bill passes, legislators will next go after personal exemptions and then religious ones. Parents of children who had serious adverse reactions will not be able to choose another exemptio. It’s not a logical fallacy to notice where things are going.

Under this bill, HPV very easily could be added to the “required for school” schedule.
I do not recall if you said what "serious adverse reaction" this parent you are referring to had. But so what? They can get a religious or PB exemption. The only difference is they have to submit it every year. That and a "medical exemption" gives one a little more credibility perhaps.

SLIPPERY SLOPE IS A LOGICAL FALLACY!

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope
"You said that if we allow A to happen, then Z will eventually happen too, therefore A should not happen.
The problem with this reasoning is that it avoids engaging with the issue at hand, and instead shifts attention to extreme hypotheticals. Because no proof is presented to show that such extreme hypotheticals will in fact occur, this fallacy has the form of an appeal to emotion fallacy by leveraging fear. In effect the argument at hand is unfairly tainted by unsubstantiated conjecture."

https://www.txstate.edu/philosophy/r...ery-Slope.html
"In a slippery slope argument, a course of action is rejected because, with little or no evidence, one insists that it will lead to a chain reaction resulting in an undesirable end or ends. The slippery slope involves an acceptance of a succession of events without direct evidence that this course of events will happen."

https://owl.excelsior.edu/argument-a...lippery-slope/
"A slippery slope fallacy occurs when someone makes a claim about a series of events that would lead to one major event, usually a bad event. In this fallacy, a person makes a claim that one event leads to another event and so on until we come to some awful conclusion. Along the way, each step or event in the faulty logic becomes more and more improbable."

https://www.logicalfallacies.info/pr...lippery-slope/
"Slippery slope arguments falsely assume that one thing must lead to another. They begin by suggesting that if we do one thing then that will lead to another, and before we know it we’ll be doing something that we don’t want to do. They conclude that we therefore shouldn’t do the first thing. The problem with these arguments is that it is possible to do the first thing that they mention without going on to do the other things; restraint is possible."

Plus many more.

Last edited by Katarina Witt; Yesterday at 04:01 PM..

 
Old Yesterday, 04:15 PM
 
Location: Washington state
5,140 posts, read 2,604,689 times
Reputation: 15397
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri View Post
It’s no one’s fault. Kara said that her daughter did not qualify for a medical exemption. I guess you’d label her an “anti-vaxxer”? There are a lot people you’d call “anti-vaxxers” who were “pro-vaxxers’” up until their kid had a bad reaction to a vaccine.
I wouldn't label her an anti-vaxxer anymore than I'd label my friend who doesn't get measles vaccinations anymore because they just don't "take" with her.

If a person can't get a vaccination because of a bad reaction, they're not an anti-vaxxer. However, if the person who CAN get a vaccination but refuses because of some silly beliefs, then I call those people anti-vaxxers. And the people who can get vaccinated but don't are the ones I feel the most angry about, because they're the ones putting people like Kara's daughter and my friend in danger of getting measles.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo48 View Post
I have an adult 35 year old immmune compromised daughter. I am PROUD of the fact that she does not DEMAND all of those around her be fully vaccinated to protect her. She is not selfish and believes in choice for others to have the right as to what they inject into their own bodies. My former coworker with Lupus felt the same. I also applaud her as well.

My daughter would never demand that all her relatives get all their vaccinations to protect her. She has young children. Demand that all children around her vaccinated sons be vaccinated so SHE doesn't catch a disease? She just decided this year after having flu in September, December, and pneumonia in January that she is going to get a flu shot herself. Guess she hasn't gotten the message that unless Grandparents, Sister, Neighbors, Friends get their vax that she could DIE? Better work on educating immune compromised people about this, Suzy Q, Katarina, et all. No, people, I am not going to any doctor, period, for any reason and not for my own daughter. She understands my choice. You DON'T.
Wonderful. You can put that on her gravestone. You are aware that she is not protected against measles and that measles is always worse for children and people over 25, right? But...she doesn't have to die. She could just end up in the hospital with hundreds of thousands of dollars owing.

I posted this on another thread about tetanus - I realize this is a thread about measles, but it's also about vaccinating, which is related to what I posted:

An unvaccinated child recently got tetanus in Oregon.

"This child began developing symptoms six days after his accident. These included "episodes of crying, jaw clenching, and involuntary upper extremity muscle spasms, followed by arching of the neck and back (opisthotonus) and generalized spasticity," as described in the report. Then, he started having difficulty breathing, which prompted the parents to contact emergency medical services. To give you sense of the severity of his condition, he had to be airlifted to the hospital.

When he got to the hospital, he had spasms in his jaw muscles, otherwise known as trismus. Therefore, even though he was thirsty, he couldn't open his mouth to drink. Since he couldn't breathe on his own either, doctors had to sedate him, put a breathing tube down his throat, and connect him to a ventilator. They gave him 3,000 units of tetanus immune globulin, the diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis vaccine (DTaP), and antibiotics. A six-year-old on a mechanical ventilator is not a pleasant sight.

Things got worse before they got better. The neck and back arching got more severe. His heart began racing. He developed high blood pressure. His body temperature went up to 104.9į F. He continued to have muscle spasms. These situations necessitated various different medications and 44 days on the mechanical ventilator. During that time, he also couldn't eat or drink anything, relying on intravenous fluids and feeding.

Fortunately, modern medicine rescued the child. Tetanus can be deadly, with 13.2% of people who get tetanus not surviving.. But this boy survived and eventually returned to running and bicycling.

All told, this six-year-old was in the intensive care unit for 47 days, other parts of the hospital for 10 more days (for a total of 57 days in the hospital), and then at a rehabilitation center for 17 additional days. This was expensive as heck, resulting in $811,929 in hospital charges, which is much, much more than a vaccine costs. This sum did not even include other costs such as the air transport that was involved in getting him to the hospital in the first place, the stay in the rehabilitation center, and the follow-up that occurred in outpatient clinics.

Oh, guess what. After all of this happened, after seeing their child go through this ordeal, after hearing the doctors explain the risks and benefits of the tetanus vaccine, the child's family still refused to allow their child to get a second dose of the DTaP vaccine and any other recommended routine vaccine. Obviously, over $800K in medical costs and seeing their child on a ventilator was not enough to sway their minds."


Jo, is this what you want for your daughter? Or for your grandkids? If so, I hope you are a rich family. Even if you have it, health insurance isn't going to pay all of this.


Edited to add: what's even worse, did you see what they used to treat this boy? Exactly the same thing they would have given him for a vaccination. And that saved him! So much for all the "junk" going into people's bodies.

Last edited by rodentraiser; Yesterday at 04:23 PM..
 
Old Yesterday, 04:44 PM
 
8,969 posts, read 5,579,539 times
Reputation: 9372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt View Post
I do not recall if you said what "serious adverse reaction" this parent you are referring to had. But so what? They can get a religious or PB exemption. The only difference is they have to submit it every year. That and a "medical exemption" gives one a little more credibility perhaps.

SLIPPERY SLOPE IS A LOGICAL FALLACY!

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope
"You said that if we allow A to happen, then Z will eventually happen too, therefore A should not happen.
The problem with this reasoning is that it avoids engaging with the issue at hand, and instead shifts attention to extreme hypotheticals. Because no proof is presented to show that such extreme hypotheticals will in fact occur, this fallacy has the form of an appeal to emotion fallacy by leveraging fear. In effect the argument at hand is unfairly tainted by unsubstantiated conjecture."

https://www.txstate.edu/philosophy/r...ery-Slope.html
"In a slippery slope argument, a course of action is rejected because, with little or no evidence, one insists that it will lead to a chain reaction resulting in an undesirable end or ends. The slippery slope involves an acceptance of a succession of events without direct evidence that this course of events will happen."

https://owl.excelsior.edu/argument-a...lippery-slope/
"A slippery slope fallacy occurs when someone makes a claim about a series of events that would lead to one major event, usually a bad event. In this fallacy, a person makes a claim that one event leads to another event and so on until we come to some awful conclusion. Along the way, each step or event in the faulty logic becomes more and more improbable."

https://www.logicalfallacies.info/pr...lippery-slope/
"Slippery slope arguments falsely assume that one thing must lead to another. They begin by suggesting that if we do one thing then that will lead to another, and before we know it weíll be doing something that we donít want to do. They conclude that we therefore shouldnít do the first thing. The problem with these arguments is that it is possible to do the first thing that they mention without going on to do the other things; restraint is possible."

Plus many more.
Itís not extreme hypotheticals. But, whatever.
 
Old Yesterday, 06:54 PM
 
Location: colorado springs, CO
4,581 posts, read 2,111,496 times
Reputation: 15726
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
From link # 1: "Though lower mortality compared with not being DTP-vaccinated was, therefore, expected, DTP vaccination was associated with a non-significant trend in the opposite direction, the HR being 2.22 (0.82-6.04) adjusted for WAZ."

The authors now have the difficulty of explaining why the risk was increased for girls and not boys. Question: are boys valued over girls in Guinea-Bissau? In other words, will a greater effort (money) be expended to get medical care for a boy over a girl?
Ouch ... Keep reading...

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
There are also difficulties with the data, as patients were lost to outmigration and a single patient could be considered either vaccinated or unvaccinated at different points in the study.

What did the children die from? How are any of those deaths related to the vaccine?

The authors conclusions are bases on small numbers. One would not expect a DPT + polio vaccine to protect against diarrheal illnesses or measles. You have to wonder how many of the deaths from diarrhea were due to rotavirus.

Link # 2 is an article by the same authors. There is no full article available, but the number of participants is small and probably subject to the same limitations as link # 1.

Link # 3 again shows the well known effect of measles prevention on mortality due to the immune damage that measles infection causes which persists for up to three years.

Link # 4 again draws conclusions from small numbers.

If you are arguing that vaccines affect boys and girls differently you need a larger study in a population that is easier to study than in a African country with limited medical resources.
What exactly is your point? That both the current CDC schedule & the vaccines are perfect, above reproach & anything else is heresy?

Small numbers per study? Sure. You did catch the "same authors" factor but you kinda missed the big picture. Those studies were just a few of the more than 700 scientific articles that have been published by The Bandim Health Project, since the foundation in 1978. https://www.bandim.org/

The Bandim Health Project is located in Guinea-Bissau, the Statens Serum Institute in Denmark & is also affiliated with the University of Southern Denmark. Their health & demographic surveillance system registers more than 100,000 people in the capital Bissau & follows 182 clusters of 100 women & their children from rural areas. Not small.

The Project's founder is Peter Aaby, who was awarded the Novo Nordisk Prize in 2000 (most important Danish award for health research) & has been credited for the discovery of non-specific effects of vaccines. Based on Aabyís work, it has been recommended that the WHO re-evaluate their vaccination programs, especially in low-income countries.

Re-evaluated. Changed. Improved. There are both sequential & sex-differential, nonspecific effects of vaccines. This not an antivaccine position. It is not antivaccine to acknowledge that vaccines are powerful enough to both decrease ... & increase; death & disease. It is not antivaccine to expect for vaccines to evolve along with the population.

Why is this so difficult for the bizarrely militant pro-vaccine to grasp? We are not a "herd" & "one size fits all immunizations" are politically-based, not science based.
 
Old Yesterday, 10:35 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
22,550 posts, read 27,508,553 times
Reputation: 28168
Quote:
Originally Posted by coschristi View Post
Ouch ... Keep reading...



What exactly is your point? That both the current CDC schedule & the vaccines are perfect, above reproach & anything else is heresy?

Small numbers per study? Sure. You did catch the "same authors" factor but you kinda missed the big picture. Those studies were just a few of the more than 700 scientific articles that have been published by The Bandim Health Project, since the foundation in 1978. https://www.bandim.org/

The Bandim Health Project is located in Guinea-Bissau, the Statens Serum Institute in Denmark & is also affiliated with the University of Southern Denmark. Their health & demographic surveillance system registers more than 100,000 people in the capital Bissau & follows 182 clusters of 100 women & their children from rural areas. Not small.

The Project's founder is Peter Aaby, who was awarded the Novo Nordisk Prize in 2000 (most important Danish award for health research) & has been credited for the discovery of non-specific effects of vaccines. Based on Aaby’s work, it has been recommended that the WHO re-evaluate their vaccination programs, especially in low-income countries.

Re-evaluated. Changed. Improved. There are both sequential & sex-differential, nonspecific effects of vaccines. This not an antivaccine position. It is not antivaccine to acknowledge that vaccines are powerful enough to both decrease ... & increase; death & disease. It is not antivaccine to expect for vaccines to evolve along with the population.

Why is this so difficult for the bizarrely militant pro-vaccine to grasp? We are not a "herd" & "one size fits all immunizations" are politically-based, not science based.
I have difficulty seeing how any study done in Guinea-Bissau can be extrapolated to a first world country. I have a strong suspicion that a poor family might be more willing to seek medical care for a son than a daughter. The country is not exactly a bastion of women's rights.

https://www.genderindex.org/wp-conte...ts/2019/GW.pdf

https://uniogbis.unmissions.org/en/g...-bread-winners

"In Guinea-Bissau women represent 51 percent of the population but are still underrepresented in the political sphere. However they are more often victims of human rights violations: early and forced marriage, domestic violence, female genital mutilation, sexual abuse and violence and sexual harassment in the workplace."

Then there is this, which shows a generally low level of health knowledge in the country.

https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentra...71-2458-10-319

This one shows the difficulties in conducting vaccine studies in the clusters you describe:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...274-8/fulltext

"... in May, 2008, the stock of DTP ran out and the introduction of the new vaccines was delayed until September, 2008, because of a shortage of petroleum for refrigerators, which interrupted the cold chain ..."

In order not to waste vaccines, multidose vials were opened only if enough children were present to ensure that most of the vial would be used.

"A civil war occurred in 1998 ..."

Since we are discussing measles:

"Children who receive measles vaccine have consistently had lower mortality than children who have not received the vaccine, when compared with unvaccinated children and when compared with those who have received DTP, both in observational studies and randomised trials (panel). In 1990–96, when overall child mortality was higher in rural Guinea-Bissau than it was in our present study, we undertook a similar study in children aged 7–13 months, in the same village clusters as we used in this study. During the 6 months after vaccination card inspection, children who had received measles vaccine had a lower risk of mortality than did children who had not received measles vaccine (adjusted mortality ratio 0∑48, 95% CI 0∑27–0∑87)."

Vaccinated children were half as likely to die.

Last edited by suzy_q2010; Yesterday at 11:41 PM..
 
Old Today, 01:23 AM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
22,550 posts, read 27,508,553 times
Reputation: 28168
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri View Post
Did you read all of it? It will limit medical exemptions only to what the ACIP deems ok which is a very narrow list, mostly consisting of anaphylaxis. This bill also allows the ACIP to determine what is aadded to the schedule. A lot of pro-vax parents arenít interested int he HPV vaccine but if this bill passes, thereís a good chance they will no longer have a choice.

Iím sure you love this but it most definitely erodes the ability to get medical exemptions even for serious adverse reactions.
No, it just preserves exemptions for serious adverse reactions that are known to be caused by vaccines. It does not allow for exemptions based on parental claims that an event with no known relationship to a vaccine is an adverse reaction.
 
Old Today, 01:32 AM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
22,550 posts, read 27,508,553 times
Reputation: 28168
Quote:
Originally Posted by coschristi View Post
Asserted with evidence. Page 8; line 10 has been crossed out. Meaning; sound medical practice will not be given consideration:
https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/defau...9a_1312_01.pdf
From your link:

25-4-904. Rules - immunization rules - rule-making authority
8 of state board of health. (1) The state board of health shall establish
9 rules and regulations for administering this part 9. Such rules and
10 regulations [delete shall] MUST ADOPT THE IMMUNIZATION RECOMMENDATIONS
11 FROM THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IMMUNIZATION PRACTICES OF THE
12 CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION IN THE FEDERAL
13 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, OR ANY SUCCESSOR
14 ENTITY, TO establish which immunizations [delete shall be] ARE required and the
15 manner and frequency of their administration, and [delete shall] MUST conform to
16 recognized standard medical practices.
 
Old Today, 02:05 AM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
22,550 posts, read 27,508,553 times
Reputation: 28168
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri View Post
Iím sure youíve already read this since you have autoimmune disease but sharing in case you havenít. Itís about the possibility of autoimmune disease being triggered by certain vaccines in genetically susceptible individuals like us.

https://link.springer.com/article/10...167-017-0101-y
Vaccines cause neither autism nor autoimmune disease.

https://www.chop.edu/centers-program...mmune-diseases

https://pediatrics.aappublications.o...tent/111/3/653
 
Old Today, 06:43 AM
 
8,969 posts, read 5,579,539 times
Reputation: 9372
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
No, it just preserves exemptions for serious adverse reactions that are known to be caused by vaccines. It does not allow for exemptions based on parental claims that an event with no known relationship to a vaccine is an adverse reaction.
No, it pretty much limits vaccine reactions to anaphylaxis.
 
Old Today, 07:25 AM
Status: "Spring has Sprung!" (set 18 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,343 posts, read 101,350,397 times
Reputation: 32752
"MUST conform to recognized standard medical practices."

What a concept! Tell us, vaccine "opponents" what does the law say now?
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.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

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