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.
Do you see anyone advocating mandated annual vaccinations by force?
No, but...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt
If not, why are you asking the question?
Because Metsfan53 said:
Quote:
well there's some air tight anecdotal evidence...
there's the problem- people like you seem to think the only world that exists is the one outside your front door....
immunocompromised people and infants don't have a choice, so if more people like you think this way and herd immunity goes away, when those people get sick/die I'm sure they'll be glad to know you had a choice....
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...
again- your whole hypothesis is based off your anecdotal evidence...thank god real science doesn't work the same...
So I was trying to understand if Metsfan53 was trying to say either a) I’m a bad person for not getting said flu shot (and possibly infecting people) or b) I oughta be made to get said flu shot (so I don't possibly infect people). But then Metsfan53 wrote:
Quote:
flu shot =/= polio vaccine
So I guess the answer is no, I’m not a bad person for not getting a flu shot and I ought not be made to get said flu shot. Which is cool with me, though the equation (flu vaccine is different than polio vaccine) is a little odd since we started our little side conversation by me saying this:
Quote:
I've never gotten the flu vaccine, and also never had the flu. My ex-GF, as a nurse, is required to get the vaccine each year and manages to come down with the flu at least once a year.
Which was in response, only, to this by KS_Referee:
Quote:
Originally Posted by KS_Referee
I use to get flu vaccines every year and every year I did, I caught the flu, typically twice. Now that I haven't had a flu vaccine in about 5 years, I also haven't had the flu in about 5 years.
But whatever. I didn’t intend to spend too much time in this thread.
I'm not "against" vaccines. I just will never get the flu vaccine, personally, and thought I'd throw in the anecdotal evidence we've seen in our lives just as KS_Referee did (and you're certainly free to think my contribution to the thread was superfluous and off-topic). Which kind of brings it back to the question of labels...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt
I don't know why anti-vaxxers like to bring up this "morality" bit so often, but whatever.
So... I’m an “anti-vaxxer” now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt
But it is anti-social as you can be contagious before you know you're sick.
Okay. Well, as long as you’re just calling me an anti-social (bad?) person and not advocating for me (and the 58% of adults who don’t get the flu vaccine) being forced, I guess we’re good to go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt
This is especially true if you work in health care, education...
I don’t.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt
...or with any group at higher risk, e.g. babies too young to be vaccinated, the elderly, the immunocompromised.
I don’t. In a typical month I don’t come into any contact with babies, elderly people, or immunocompromised people. But I don't clean every door handle I touch, either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
...applying the term "anti-vaxxer' 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...
it's called being a parent...my kid screamed and we still had them get the shot, because it's best for my kid...it's also why I don't let them eat ice cream for breakfast even when they cry....I'd rather deal with crying and screaming for a few min than illness/disease.
Do you have teens? What you do to force a HPV or Flu Shot on them? Ground them? The "sentence" doesn't warrant the "crime" over that in my book. There are far worse things that a teenager can do than just refuse those vaccinations. Take that from a Granny.
i am not against vaccines, i am against being forced to take these vaccines. people keep saying that we should have choices in everything, we should decide whether or not we take what ever drugs we want, even heroin cocaine, etc. and then these same people turn around and say that we must get vaccinated.
we either have freedom of choice, or we dont.
Yeah, I want the freedom to drive as fast as I want. Who are you to tell me how fast I should drive. After all my decision only affects me..
Freedom of choice ends when others can be negatively impacted by our choices.
I think we should have anti vaccination zones so all the anti vaccers can live together and not risk the rest of us. Then everyone can be happy.
No, but...Because Metsfan53 said: So I was trying to understand if Metsfan53 was trying to say either a) I’m a bad person for not getting said flu shot (and possibly infecting people) or b) I oughta be made to get said flu shot (so I don't possibly infect people). But then Metsfan53 wrote: So I guess the answer is no, I’m not a bad person for not getting a flu shot and I ought not be made to get said flu shot. Which is cool with me, though the equation (flu vaccine is different than polio vaccine) is a little odd since we started our little side conversation by me saying this: Which was in response, only, to this by KS_Referee: But whatever. I didn’t intend to spend too much time in this thread.
I'm not "against" vaccines. I just will never get the flu vaccine, personally, and thought I'd throw in the anecdotal evidence we've seen in our lives just as KS_Referee did (and you're certainly free to think my contribution to the thread was superfluous and off-topic). Which kind of brings it back to the question of labels... So... I’m an “anti-vaxxer” now? Okay. Well, as long as you’re just calling me an anti-social (bad?) person and not advocating for me (and the 58% of adults who don’t get the flu vaccine) being forced, I guess we’re good to go. I don’t.I don’t. In a typical month I don’t come into any contact with babies, elderly people, or immunocompromised people. But I don't clean every door handle I touch, either.I would agree. But it seems others would not.
No one, including metsfan, has suggested mandatory forced flu (or any other) vaccines.
Yes, there's a difference between flu vaccine and polio vaccine. The last case of wild polio in the US was in 1979, the last in the western hemisphere in 1992. We vaccinate for polio b/c it is "an airplane ride away" in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Nigeria, and nowhere else. I'm in a rush and don't have time to look up flu stats for this year, and in any event flu season isn't over, but every year thousands of people get the flu and many DIE from it. There have been 72 pediatric flu deaths this year. It looks like there have been about 35,000 positive flu test results as well. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/
No one, including metsfan, has suggested mandatory forced flu (or any other) vaccines.
I did not say anyone had. I asked. I'm okay being called anti-social and other names.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt
Yes, there's a difference between flu vaccine and polio vaccine.
Yes. I'm agreeing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt
...every year thousands of people get the flu and many DIE from it...
I understand, really I do.
As long as we're not talking about force, I will continue to not get the flu vaccine, and you can continue to think people like me are anti-social jerks and anti-vaxxers who ignore death statistics.
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.
I basically agree with you, and am old enough to be your mother. My childhood vaccinations were maybe 5, the last of which I got in 1952. ONE Polio vaccination in elementary school. The only exemption being in 1969 when I went to Europe and had to have another Small Pox vax.
I used to get the flu a lot when younger, but no more. Lived through at least two Flu Epidemic in the 50's and 60's. I stopped getting the flu, ironically, when I was in my 40's about your age too. I've worked in public schools and been around a lot of little kids with it, and my own family, and just don't catch it any more. Superhuman the posters on here say. They don't care why not. Shut up and just get your flu shot to protect others. When I don't HAVE the flu?
My husband had a Shingles shot and still got Shingles in his 60's. My SIL got Shingles in his 30's. Would not have been offered the vaccination at his age. Both were under a lot of STRESS at the time. I think stress contributed to their shingles.
We live in a very stressed out society where people are so afraid of being sick from anything, and of course, dying. That alone is not healthy. The Medical Profession and the Big Pharms use this fear for their own ends. Yes, I am glad we have a choice, especially as adults. Watch out, though, that will change if we let them.
Edit: I would like the poster to quote me one state in the Nation which requires K-12 Public School Staff to be vaccinated for employment. Not California Day Care Centers, but K-12. Education isn't a Health Care Profession.
Let me play a bit of Devil's Advocate here. So what you are saying is that if a Medical Professional recommends any vaccine (or medication?), and a patient refuses they are an anti-vaxers because they are refusing medical advice?
There are vaccines and then there are vaccines. Putting aside children (child endangerment issue), what about an adult who refuses a Tetanus shot? Are they putting the community in danger by refusing that one? Anti-vaxxer simply because refusing what doctor tells them to do?
Then we get into diseases that are not air borne and highly contagious to the general public. Blood borne diseases. Certain actions by an individual need to be performed in order for others to catch them, specifically Hep. B and HPV. Simply being in the presence of another with those diseases won't cause others to catch them. Again, Anti-Vaxxers for refusing those?
I read an article which said it was safe to give HPV vax to pregnant women. Why? Clearly that would not be to protect an already sexually active woman. This would be a stealth way to vaccinate her unborn baby. This raises other issues with pregnant women. Do they have the right to refuse vaccinations aimed at their unborn babies? You have to vaccinate the adult in order to vaccinate the baby she is carrying. As more and more vaccines are added during pregnancy, it is going to become a problem. Get the baby vaccinated before it's even born?
Personally, the bigger issue is that medical professional do not like patients going against their advice for vaccines, or any thing else.
If there is a vaccine you refuse to take because you believe - contrary to the science - that the vaccine is more dangerous than the disease, yes, you are anti-vaccine. Refusing tetanus vaccine is only dangerous to the unvaccinated person. However, death from tetanus is a horrible way to die, and before you do die you are likely to cost the health care system a few hundred thousand dollars.
If you cannot understand that vaccinating the mother protects the baby from illnesses which are more likely to kill young infants, then you are anti-vaccine. That includes vaccination against flu and pertussis.
What was the thesis of the HPV article? Was it in the context of vaccinating someone who did not know she was pregnant at the time of vaccination? If you are going to tell us you "read an article" please link to it.
Any vaccination the mother receives will only provide temporary protection for her baby. There is no "Get the baby vaccinated before it's even born?"
Yes, pregnant women can refuse vaccines aimed at protecting their babies. Unfortunately, it is the baby that is at risk when his mom does that.
All that is needed to get hepatitis B is to come into contact with infected blood. Your child could get it from a playmate. Toddlers bite. Kids get injuries and bleed on other kids. Babies can catch HPV from an infected mom at the time of delivery. This study from Finland shows it is possible for all members of a family, including children, to be HPV positive.
Why even see a doctor if you are going to refuse to follow his advice? Why should the doctor want you as a patient?
What do you perceive to be the "child endangerment" from vaccines?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nepenthe
I just came here to do a drive-by post and say I've never gotten the flu vaccine, and also never had the flu. My ex-GF, as a nurse, is required to get the vaccine each year and manages to come down with the flu at least once a year. She thinks it's fairly useless.
Does she have the "flu" confirmed by testing? not all illnesses that look like "flu" are "flu". As previously pointed out, her profession increases the chance she will be exposed to all sorts of infectious diseases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnywhereElse
I remember when kids got measles, mumps and chicken pox. I did, as did every kid I knew. Funny though, I didn't know a single kid with autism and saw none out in public even though I was exposed to a larger population. It is playing Russian roulette. Risk your kids in the name of being brainwashed by big pharma?
I am sick of these people who try to force others to do what they will do or have done to feel better about endangering themselves and their families.
Maybe if the kids weren't shot up with so many chemicals now we wouldn't be seeing them with REAL life threatening diseases that have NO treatment. At 62, I am healthier than many in their 20s, 30s and 40s, of course, they didn't have to go through the flu, measles, mumps or chicken pox, but I prefer that to the debilitating diseases that I am seeing in younger people. Something is causing that. Their immune systems are not functioning properly.
Make informed decisions. Too many people want to not think for themselves these days and there will be a price for that.
I will not have people without the ability to make informed decisions dictating what I or anyone in my family does.
Do the research before getting the vaccines and listen to actual "in the field" outcomes, not those websites that get grants from our government and big pharma and whose motivation is to keep the money rolling in and to heck with the people ignorant enough to just fall in line and take it!
Vaccine safety? Learn about how one's immune system works. Look at the health crisis now suffered by our youth and young adults.
If you never met anyone with autism when you were growing up it is because you were not very observant and those with severe autism were hidden from you. DH's best childhood friend has Asperger's. It was just not called that 72 years ago.
There is no evidence that vaccines are causing these "debilitating diseases" you perceive "younger people' have in such large numbers. If you believe they do, you are the one who needs to learn "how the immune system works". The "risk" your kids take from not being vaccinated is much greater than the risks from vaccines.
The information we have on the safety of vaccines does come from "in the field" outcomes - from around the world.
Pharma would make more money treating people who are sick with vaccine preventable diseases than it does from vaccines. Of all the anti-vax arguments, the "it's just the money" is one of those that makes the least sense.
No one will force you to vaccinate anyone in your family. The rest of us have the right to limit exposure of our families to yours, however.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sky1
Now some here that are for forcing vaccines and some here are for having choice regarding them
The argument for some is that if you do not take the vaccine you will infect those who do take the vaccine? How do they come up with that? Is it that is may mutate and then affect all?
Then the other argument is that some feel that the vaccine could cause a rare side affect seriously injuring ore even kill their family member. So they should have the choice on that risk.
Both valid points now here are some other things to think about.
What if a vaccine was made to prevent you from being affected by a virus that the same manufacturer releases into the wild? Would that manufacturer get rich?
What if the Government Mandated that everyone gets the vaccination? Couldn't they charge as much as they wanted for it?
What if a manufacturer works a deal with a president elect to offer huge campaign contributions in exchange for mandatory vaccinations?
I see corruption by this and is why I feel that vaccinations should be up to the parent.
What a bunch of baloney. Forget the conspiracy theories. There are no conspiracies concerning vaccines.
No one is "forced" to vaccinate.
A small number of people who are vaccinated are still susceptible to the disease because the vaccine did not "take". Some are susceptible because they have conditions that impair the ability of the immune system to respond to the disease even though they have been vaccinated. Others are too young to be vaccinated or have medical contraindications to taking vaccines. Vaccine refusers are a danger to all of those people.
The chance of being injured or killed by a vaccine preventable disease is many, many, many times greater than the risk from vaccines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floorist
The why risk taking them.
You are a victim of the Nirvana fallacy. Only a vaccine that is 100% effective is worth taking? Most are 90 to 95%. Those are not worth the risk? What do you perceive the risks of vaccines to be? The risk of serious reactions to most vaccines is on the order of 1 in a million.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floorist
According to Shelly Burgess, an FDA spokesperson, the FDA and CDC "have not detected new safety concerns or unusual reporting patterns." That's odd, because the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), jointly operated by the FDA and CDC, has received more than 59,000 reports of adverse reactions to pneumococcal and Hib vaccines during the past several years. More than half of these cases - 30,094 - required hospitalization, with 2,169 deaths. About 95 percent of these deaths were in children under three years of age.
In the last five years, from 2006 through 2010, 17,595 people in the U.S. reported adverse reactions to pneumococcal and Hib vaccines; 464 of these people died after receiving their shots. It should also be noted that these numbers only represent "official" reports to VAERS. The former head of the FDA, David Kessler, has estimated that for every official report of an adverse drug reaction, about 100 other people are also hurt but fail to make a report.
In Japan, most vaccines are not required, so the mad, coercive tactics used by American vaccine officials to vaccinate all U.S. children and adults is not universal. In fact, Japanese infants are only expected to receive polio and DTaP vaccines. Pneumococcal and Hib vaccines were recently added to the Japanese schedule but are optional. Compare that to the more crowded, dangerous, and lucrative U.S. infant vaccine schedule: babies are expected to receive several doses of polio, DTaP, hepatitis B, pneumococcal, Hib, rotavirus, and influenza vaccines.
In summary, four Japanese children died after receiving vaccines and the Japanese Ministry of Health immediately halted the vaccine program. U.S. health officials declared this action "foolish" even though it is likely to save additional babies from harm. In the United States, thousands of people died after receiving vaccines for the very same diseases but authorities don't give a damn. U.S. vaccine authorities believe that children are expendable, a guaranteed, targeted market to be used for commercial benefit. Disability and death of U.S. citizens after receiving mandated vaccines is merely treated as the cost of doing business.
If you quote "Natural News" you show you have been brainwashed by anti-vax propaganda.
If you try to use VAERS to show vaccines cause injuries and deaths you are showing us you are ignorant about how VAERS works. The anti-vax gurus want you to be ignorant.
As has been pointed out, a report to VAERS does not mean the vaccine caused the condition in the report. Anyone can make a report, even people who do not know who the person they are reporting about. VAERS is full of reports like "I read on the internet that HPV vaccine has killed 103 girls." VAERS cannot be used to determine causation. The anti-vax establishment is silent on the Vaccine Safety Datalink, which uses actual medical records to look for complications from vaccines. The Datalink can determine causation.
Japan has made some foolish decisions concerning vaccines, with resulting increases in illness, injuries, and deaths from vaccine preventable diseases. It's not a good country to hold up as the ideal for vaccination, though their current recommended schedule is pretty much the same as that in the US. In addition, Japan uses BCG and Japaneses encephalitis vaccines, neither of which is given in the US.
Measles is still endemic in Japan, meaning the wild virus circulates in the population.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo48
Ah, but there are pediatricians who will space out vaccinations by parents requests. My daughter has told me that her Pediatrician does that. Do you disagree with better late than NEVER? If two adults are holding down a screaming, kicking 2 year old trying to give him a shot, you don't think they won't wait? "Next visit" his doctor said. Next visit was 6 months later. Imagine trying to hold down a teenager who didn't want a Flu Shot?
Some pediatricians have decided to pander to parents who think they know more than the experts. That does not mean it is the right thing to do.
I would rather hold a two year old down once for two injections than put him through the same thing on another visit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo48
Absolutely, because infants or those immune compromised will not catch the disease from somebody who cannot catch the disease themselves whether you believe that is because they were vaccinated or have lifetime immunity from having the disease themselves. If Gramps had measles, mumps, chicken pox as a child, he won't be catching it AGAIN, or giving them to anyone. This is why I commented on the other poster getting his Shingles vax. Correlating his AGE from that Shingles vaccination.
In order to be immune from having the disease you have to have the disease. That means get sick and run the risk of complications or death from the disease.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nepenthe
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.
Someone who has a problem with recurrent shingles could get the vaccine at less than 50 years of age. It would be an "off label" use and may not be covered by insurance, but a doctor could give it.
If you leave your house you are coming in contact with elderly people, children, and immunocompromised folks. You cannot tell by looking at someone whether he has an immune deficiency.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo48
Just my opinion, but I think that the chicken pox vaccination has caused the increase in shingles. Adults not getting their chicken pox "boosters" when children, because of vaccination, are not getting chicken pox. Only a disease for old people? Hardly. Adults in their 30's and younger are now coming down with shingles. WHY? The medical professionals like to say the older you get the more your chance of getting shingles. Doesn't this contract it? No matter. Create another vaccine to prevent it.
One medical professional on here quoted that over 80 years old greatly increases the rate for shingles. Well, how much exposure in the past did an over 80 year old person have with children with chicken pox to begin with? 30, 40, 50, 60 year olds DID in the past but not even that today.
The chickenpox vaccine has not caused the increase in shingles.
"They found that annual rates of shingles increased 39 percent over the 18-year study period. However, they didn't find a statistically significant change in the rate after the introduction of the chickenpox vaccine. They also found that the rate of shingles didn't vary from state to state where there were different rates of chickenpox vaccine coverage."
Yes the risk of getting shingles increases with age. It's a fact, not just something "medical professionals like to say."
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.
You are anti-vaccine if you refuse some vaccines because in order to do so you either have failed to understand the benefit of the vaccine compared to the risk or you vastly underestimate the risk of the disease. For example, being anti-HPV vaccine because you are convinced that Pap smears are the answer to HPV or being anti-rotavirus vaccine because you are convinced that if your baby gets it you can just nurse him 24 hours a day and it will be all better. The same for flu.
If you refuse vaccines based on bad "research" you are anti-vaccine. Either that or you are knowingly hiding in the herd. If so, own up to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo48
Please tell me you are not equating the Flu with Polio. You must be very young or have drunk far too much Kool Aid.
A classic example of the inability to evaluate risk with respect to vaccine preventable diseases.
Not a single person has had polio in the US this year.
Seventy two children have died from flu during the current season.
Which is more dangerous for US children, polio or flu?
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.
You must be very young or have drunk far too much Kool Aid.
They don't care why not. Shut up and just get your flu shot to protect others. When I don't HAVE the flu?