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.
like I said- there's a whole world beyond what's outside your door....you might try discovering that some day...
I'm glad I can choose whether or not to get that vaccine. How you're turning that into an insult about me being insular or unworldly I'm not sure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metsfan53
when you touch a door knob with germs and someone comes by twenty minutes later and touches it, you're spreading germs even if you've never seen the person....
Can you restate your position? Do you advocate mandated annual vaccinations by force for the entire population, or something else?
I'm 42 actually, and yah I know I can't get it until 50+.
Yes, I had childhood immunizations consistent with someone born in 1974, but haven't had a needle pierce my skin since I was age... 13 I think.
I rarely come into any contact with elderly people, children, or immunocompromised people.
I never get the flu. It's not my responsibility to get the flu shot or flu mist, but if I GOT sick with influenza it would be my responsibility to take myself out of the community for the time it took to get past the contagious stage (whatever that is).
I'm glad we have a choice, and I will exercise my choice.
You are contagious for a day before symptoms begin.
again- your whole hypothesis is based off your anecdotal evidence...thank god real science doesn't work the same...
If I'd repeatedly been sick I might feel differently. However, it appears I'm not prone to the flu.
Please restate your position. Do you advocate mandated annual vaccinations by force for the entire population, or something else? Is a person immoral for not getting the flu shot?
If I'd repeatedly been sick I might feel differently. However, it appears I'm not prone to the flu.
Please restate your position. Do you advocate mandated annual vaccinations by force for the entire population, or something else? Is a person immoral for not getting the flu shot?
It doesn't IMPLY any such thing. It MEANS being against it. That is what anti means.
But should someone who declines one or a few vaccines be labeled as "anti-vax"? Or is someone only labeled as being "anti-vax" if they against all vaccines? More importantly, why do we even have labels for a person who is simply making health decisions for their themselves and members of their family?
If I'd repeatedly been sick I might feel differently. However, it appears I'm not prone to the flu.
Please restate your position. Do you advocate mandated annual vaccinations by force for the entire population, or something else? Is a person immoral for not getting the flu shot?
You didn't ask me, but I'll answer. Do you see anyone advocating mandated annual vaccinations by force? If not, why are you asking the question. I don't know why anti-vaxers like to bring up this "morality" bit so often, but whatever. No, it's not immoral, like murder. But it is anti-social as you can be contagious before you know you're sick. This is especially true if you work in health care, education, or with any group at higher risk, e.g. babies too young to be vaccinated, the elderly, the immunocompromised.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
But should someone who declines one or a few vaccines be labeled as "anti-vax"? Or is someone only labeled as being "anti-vax" if they against all vaccines? More importantly, why do we even have labels for a person who is simply making health decisions for their themselves and members of their family?
1. What suzy said.
2. Ditto
3. Because a) people should own their decisions; b) because it's not just a decision for themselves and their family members. It's part of the "social contract". See my answer to Nepenthe above.
Since "anti" means "against" and "vaxer" presumably means vaccinate or vaccines then applying the term "anti-vaxer' to anyone other then those who refuse all vaccines is an inaccurate descriptor since someone who gets some vaccines is clearly not against vaccines and hence the label does not fit. This label only truly applies to someone who is against ALL vaccines.
Again, I don't know why a label like this even needs to exist but since it does we may as well use it in it's proper context.
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.
