U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 10-14-2012, 04:10 PM
 
12,886 posts, read 15,438,852 times
Reputation: 14853

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
Who is being "forced" to take vaccines?
Video: Baby Girl Vaccinated by FORCE is NOW Autistic - TRAGIC and CRIMINAL! Little Girl Was Taken Out Of Mother's Arms | Love for Life

 
Old 10-14-2012, 04:19 PM
 
8,487 posts, read 5,905,566 times
Reputation: 1114
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
You have the right to choose.

You do not have the right to put other people at risk because you do not "believe" in vaccines.
This is propaganda.
I should always have the right to choose, for whatever reason, about what goes in my body. As to parents they also have the right to choose for their child.
 
Old 10-14-2012, 04:23 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
23,425 posts, read 28,280,822 times
Reputation: 29014

Sorry, if the mother allowed the child to be taken out of her arms, she consented to the vaccination.

I do not buy that the vaccination was "forced". All she had to do was take the child and leave.

I do believe that her children had adverse reactions to the vaccine. No one denies that adverse reactions to vaccines happen.
 
Old 10-14-2012, 04:31 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
23,425 posts, read 28,280,822 times
Reputation: 29014
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDusr View Post
This is propaganda.
I should always have the right to choose, for whatever reason, about what goes in my body. As to parents they also have the right to choose for their child.
You are being obtuse. You have the right to choose not to vaccinate.

The majority of us believe that vaccines are safe and effective.

We have the right to say that we do not want your unvaccinated child in a classroom with ours just because you do not "believe" in vaccines.

Doctors also have the right to dismiss unvaccinated children from their practices because they do not want unvaccinated children in their waiting rooms, where they pose a risk to newborns and children who have true medical contraindications to vaccination.

Do not vaccinate if you do not wish to do so.

There is nothing wrong with requiring that someone who wants to exempt his child discuss the exemption with a professional. You are just afraid that parents who do so will be convinced that the anti-vaccine propaganda they read on the internet is the garbage that it is.
 
Old 10-14-2012, 04:33 PM
 
8,487 posts, read 5,905,566 times
Reputation: 1114
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
It's a simple logic statement:

Vaccine triggers proper immune response.

Immune response prevents disease.


Ergo, vaccine prevents disease.

There is difference between stating that proper nutrition reduces the risk of getting sick and claiming a therapeutic effect of taking vitamin D.

Correcting a vitamin D deficiency would be indicated.

Popping a few vitamin D tablets because a coworker came down with the flu is not likely to do a whole lot.

The article referenced in this thread did not consider whether the children were deficient in vitamin D to begin with. Eleven percent of the kids who took vitamin D still got the flu.

So, yes, if you are deficient, take Vitamin D. There are many reasons to correct vitamin D deficiency.

The implication is that vitamin D works better than the flu vaccine and all one needs to is take vitamin D.
The article did not show any evidence of that.
One has no way of knowing if what you stated is correct except to test it in some way. Every individual is just that. You are assuming. You cannot say everyone develops antibodies or even a proper immune response w/o testing it in some reliable way. You may presume or guess at this, but it doesn't make it so unless you test for evidence. Even with antibodies you can get sick.

As to vitamin D there is a whole slew of disease connected with what are considered inadequate amts. One certainly cannot have a vaccine deficiency now can they?

Regardless, the individuals immune system and the body are doing the work.
 
Old 10-14-2012, 04:48 PM
 
8,487 posts, read 5,905,566 times
Reputation: 1114
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
You are being obtuse. You have the right to choose not to vaccinate.

The majority of us believe that vaccines are safe and effective.

We have the right to say that we do not want your unvaccinated child in a classroom with ours just because you do not "believe" in vaccines.

Doctors also have the right to dismiss unvaccinated children from their practices because they do not want unvaccinated children in their waiting rooms, where they pose a risk to newborns and children who have true medical contraindications to vaccination.

Do not vaccinate if you do not wish to do so.

There is nothing wrong with requiring that someone who wants to exempt his child discuss the exemption with a professional. You are just afraid that parents who do so will be convinced that the anti-vaccine propaganda they read on the internet is the garbage that it is.
I am not being obtuse. I was quite clear. Majority has nothing to do with it. If you want to prevent children from going to school then that individuals tax dollars and the federal cut need to go right back to them. In the case of "public" schools. I have no problem with this.

If a doctor chooses not to serve such people, fine. Any other business, for that matter. They can advertise it for all I care. (lol) I am not afraid of any such thing. Amazing you can make such accusations based on nothing, but your presumptions.

Each state is different. I believe in a person's right to choose, period. Not obtuse. I was referencing policy, law and individuals statements in this regard. It is not my job to decide for others what to do. This is pure arrogance and the use of force or coercion is abuse.
 
Old 10-14-2012, 04:48 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
23,425 posts, read 28,280,822 times
Reputation: 29014
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDusr View Post
One has no way of knowing if what you stated is correct except to test it in some way. Every individual is just that. You are assuming. You cannot say everyone develops antibodies or even a proper immune response w/o testing it in some reliable way. You may presume or guess at this, but it doesn't make it so unless you test for evidence. Even with antibodies you can get sick.

As to vitamin D there is a whole slew of disease connected with what are considered inadequate amts. One certainly cannot have a vaccine deficiency now can they?

Regardless, the individuals immune system and the body are doing the work.
Still struggling with logic, are we?

You are assuming that vaccines are not tested to make sure they produce an antibody response. They are.

Some people do not produce an effective response to the vaccine. They get sick. That does not mean that no one mounts an effective response and therefore the vaccine is ineffective. The immune system does its work because the vaccine gives it something to work with. Think of the immune system as an automobile. It is in working order and fueled up. It will not go anywhere until someone turns on the ignition, puts it in gear, and steps on the accelerator. The fuel makes the car go, but it cannot happen until the ignition is turned on. A vaccine is the key that turns on the immune system so the immune system can do its thing and make antibodies.

The biggest test of a vaccine is how well it reduces the risk of disease when the vaccinated person is exposed to the disease. That varies with the vaccine. Many are over 90% effective. The flu vaccine is less so, mainly because of the decisions that have to be made as to which strains to include in the vaccine.

You can continue to believe that taking vitamin D for a few days will prevent the flu. I have seen no evidence that it will.

Vitamin D deficiency needs to be treated, for a number of reasons, including bone protection.

But you can still get the flu even if you take vitamin D, are not deficient, and are otherwise absolutely, outstandingly, perfectly healthy. All it takes is touching the wrong elevator button and then rubbing your nose or having someone with the flu sneeze in your face.
 
Old 10-14-2012, 04:53 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
23,425 posts, read 28,280,822 times
Reputation: 29014
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDusr View Post
I am not being obtuse. I was quite clear. Majority has nothing to do with it. If you want to prevent children from going to school then that individuals tax dollars and the federal cut need to go right back to them. In the case of "public" schools. I have no problem with this.

If a doctor chooses not to serve such people, fine. Any other business, for that matter. They can advertise it for all I care. (lol) I am not afraid of any such thing. Amazing you can make such accusations based on nothing, but your presumptions.

Each state is different. I believe in a person's right to choose, period. Not obtuse. I was referencing policy, law and individuals statements in this regard. It is not my job to decide for others what to do. This is pure arrogance and the use of force or coercion is abuse.
You believe in your own right to choose, but apparently you do not believe in the majority's right to choose. You want to send your unvaccinated child to public school. The majority gets to set the policy. The policy is to encourage parents to vaccinate their children. You either abide by the policy or drum up enough support to change it.

Until then, start your own private school for unvaccinated children or home school.
 
Old 10-14-2012, 05:02 PM
 
8,487 posts, read 5,905,566 times
Reputation: 1114
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
Still struggling with logic, are we?

You are assuming that vaccines are not tested to make sure they produce an antibody response. They are.

Some people do not produce an effective response to the vaccine. They get sick. That does not mean that no one mounts an effective response and therefore the vaccine is ineffective. The immune system does its work because the vaccine gives it something to work with. Think of the immune system as an automobile. It is in working order and fueled up. It will not go anywhere until someone turns on the ignition, puts it in gear, and steps on the accelerator. The fuel makes the car go, but it cannot happen until the ignition is turned on. A vaccine is the key that turns on the immune system so the immune system can do its thing and make antibodies.

The biggest test of a vaccine is how well it reduces the risk of disease when the vaccinated person is exposed to the disease. That varies with the vaccine. Many are over 90% effective. The flu vaccine is less so, mainly because of the decisions that have to be made as to which strains to include in the vaccine.

You can continue to believe that taking vitamin D for a few days will prevent the flu. I have seen no evidence that it will.

Vitamin D deficiency needs to be treated, for a number of reasons, including bone protection.

But you can still get the flu even if you take vitamin D, are not deficient, and are otherwise absolutely, outstandingly, perfectly healthy. All it takes is touching the wrong elevator button and then rubbing your nose or having someone with the flu sneeze in your face.
No, I am aware of vaccine testing. However, everyone is an individual with varying response. Every situation is different. There are different variables.

You are assuming a "proper" immune response if you do not test for it. You simply do not know if you have a proper immune response on someone w/o testing for it. Very simple to understand.

Why do you not understand this? I would say you have problem with details and logic. You are making blanket absolute statements, which is ironic since you have accused others of this. Specifics matter.

I didn't say I believed what you stated in regard to vitamin D.

Yes the same is true for a vaccine.
 
Old 10-14-2012, 05:14 PM
 
8,487 posts, read 5,905,566 times
Reputation: 1114
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
You believe in your own right to choose, but apparently you do not believe in the majority's right to choose. You want to send your unvaccinated child to public school. The majority gets to set the policy. The policy is to encourage parents to vaccinate their children. You either abide by the policy or drum up enough support to change it.

Until then, start your own private school for unvaccinated children or home school.
I believe in individual choice, even in the market. The majority is about market share and mob rule. Vaccines are products.

I am well aware of the options and how this can play out. Homeschooling has been on the rise for sometime.

I stated that in regard to public school, they deserve their money back if they will not be served.
Got no problem with that either. States do offer exemptions, though this varies.
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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:32 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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