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)
 
Old 09-12-2019, 06:15 AM
 
8,354 posts, read 2,464,364 times
Reputation: 9724

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lola The yorkie View Post
Just because the parent had a reaction does not mean her child was at risk
If you were given a drug that almost killed you, you'd have no problem giving it to your own child? Wouldn't mention it all to your doctor? Have zero concerns?

Really?

 
Old 09-12-2019, 07:23 AM
 
6,835 posts, read 4,740,185 times
Reputation: 13550
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffrow1 View Post
Good points all.

The Doc in San Diego with all the waivers is a good example. I looked at the data kind of quick and dirty but observed a few things.

She gave waivers in the following years listed:

10 2015
48 2016
57 2017
22 2018
CA law excluding religious exemptions was in 2015, law regarding exemption monitoring pending but probably started getting traction 2017 - 2018.

Looks like she was just getting cranked up and then either publicity or Medical Board shut her down.

She charged for the exemption. Generally the exemption would be written gratis and as part of regular doctor / patient relationship.

Her practice is cash and carry, no insurance accepted. Very similar to your pill mills and pot docs.
Thanks for finding and posting those numbers. They sum up why California was wise to pass the bill allowing oversight on doctors whose waiver numbers are high. Especially one like this where the numbers rose significantly when personal/religious waivers were ended and when it became likely they’re going to be scrutinized the numbers sharply declined.
 
Old 09-12-2019, 07:39 AM
 
4,224 posts, read 2,920,143 times
Reputation: 8122
Some of these posts give me the impression that the posters believe that any unvaccinated person is actually carrying those diseases and will infect others, therefore they should be feared, shunned and banned.

Jo's story about going in the NICU for example, I would much rather prevent someone with a cough, sniffles, runny noses, rash, etc that is actually sick, not one who is strong enough to stay healthy for decades, even without vaccines.

I think reasonable people should expect that a certain number of people will not get all the vaccines. It doesn't mean they will get sick. It doesn't mean they will hurt your child or that they have any evil intent toward your family.

Was I right in agreeing with our pediatrician that my 3rd should forego the rest of her vaccines after a bad reaction? 30 years later, I think so. She has been healthy except for bad reactions to other chemicals, bc pills, hair dyes, etc, so maybe we dodged a bullet. Has she ever infected anyone else with any disease? No. Did she get a medical exemption? No, we just did the personal exemption back then.

If that wasn't allowed, I would've sought out those doctors that were more lenient in the exemptions in order to protect her. That's probably why their numbers are higher.
 
Old 09-12-2019, 07:59 AM
 
6,835 posts, read 4,740,185 times
Reputation: 13550
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaraG View Post
Some of these posts give me the impression that the posters believe that any unvaccinated person is actually carrying those diseases and will infect others, therefore they should be feared, shunned and banned.

Jo's story about going in the NICU for example, I would much rather prevent someone with a cough, sniffles, runny noses, rash, etc that is actually sick, not one who is strong enough to stay healthy for decades, even without vaccines.

I think reasonable people should expect that a certain number of people will not get all the vaccines. It doesn't mean they will get sick. It doesn't mean they will hurt your child or that they have any evil intent toward your family.

Was I right in agreeing with our pediatrician that my 3rd should forego the rest of her vaccines after a bad reaction? 30 years later, I think so. She has been healthy except for bad reactions to other chemicals, bc pills, hair dyes, etc, so maybe we dodged a bullet. Has she ever infected anyone else with any disease? No. Did she get a medical exemption? No, we just did the personal exemption back then.

If that wasn't allowed, I would've sought out those doctors that were more lenient in the exemptions in order to protect her. That's probably why their numbers are higher.
I donít get that impression at all. In fact the only people talking about unvaccinated adults have been those who support not vaccinating kids. Their argument seems to be why worry about kids when adults arenít fully vaccinated either.

Iím not as concerned about unvaccinated adults as I am unvaccinated kids. If an adult is unvaccinated and contracts measles, a vulnerable child might encounter them for a second or two in passing at a mall or grocery store. The risk of transmission is pretty low. But, what about the risk if a vulnerable kid is sitting next to a contagious student 8 hours a day? The transmission rate is high. You only have to look at the flu outbreaks that have shut down schools to know that. And the flu transmission rate is way lower than that of measles.
 
Old 09-12-2019, 08:05 AM
 
10,092 posts, read 6,019,443 times
Reputation: 9974
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNC4Me View Post
I don’t get that impression at all. In fact the only people talking about unvaccinated adults have been those who support not vaccinating kids. Their argument seems to be why worry about kids when adults aren’t fully vaccinated either.

I’m not as concerned about unvaccinated adults as I am unvaccinated kids. If an adult is unvaccinated and contracts measles, a vulnerable child might encounter them for a second or two in passing at a mall or grocery store. The risk of transmission is pretty low. But, what about the risk if a vulnerable kid is sitting next to a contagious student 8 hours a day? The transmission rate is high. You only have to look at the flu outbreaks that have shut down schools to know that. And the flu transmission rate is way lower than that of measles.

It’s extremely disingenuous to state that there are posters here who “support not vaccinating kids”. There are people who support choice and who also support medical decisions being made between doctor and patient. I have not seen anyone posting in support of “not vaccinating kids”.

In regards to adults, measles is far more dangerous to an adult then it is to a child and adults also interact in close quarters aka in workplaces so I’m not sure I understand your position. There are also far more cases of flu in any given year then measles so again, a confusing position. That vast majority of kids are vaccinated. The vast majority of adults are not vaccinated on that same schedule. Maybe if you allowed kids to use the same schedule as their parents were subject to you’d see much more fully vaccinated kids. But the reality is, the number and doses of vaccines has increased to a point where many question if it’s too much.
 
Old 09-12-2019, 08:10 AM
 
10,092 posts, read 6,019,443 times
Reputation: 9974
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaraG View Post
Some of these posts give me the impression that the posters believe that any unvaccinated person is actually carrying those diseases and will infect others, therefore they should be feared, shunned and banned.

Jo's story about going in the NICU for example, I would much rather prevent someone with a cough, sniffles, runny noses, rash, etc that is actually sick, not one who is strong enough to stay healthy for decades, even without vaccines.

I think reasonable people should expect that a certain number of people will not get all the vaccines. It doesn't mean they will get sick. It doesn't mean they will hurt your child or that they have any evil intent toward your family.

Was I right in agreeing with our pediatrician that my 3rd should forego the rest of her vaccines after a bad reaction? 30 years later, I think so. She has been healthy except for bad reactions to other chemicals, bc pills, hair dyes, etc, so maybe we dodged a bullet. Has she ever infected anyone else with any disease? No. Did she get a medical exemption? No, we just did the personal exemption back then.

If that wasn't allowed, I would've sought out those doctors that were more lenient in the exemptions in order to protect her. That's probably why their numbers are higher.
I think your post perfectly illustrates the point. You were advised by your doctor, after a your child suffered an adverse reaction to not vaccinate her further. You sought a personal exemption. If you lived in CA, you would have sought out a ME after they eliminated Personal and religious exemptions. Under the new law, your child would be denied any exemption and you’d be faced with either vaccinating her and potentially injuring her in the process due to past bad reactions or homeschooling. It seems really messed up that you would have to make that kind of choice and that your doctor’s advice would not be good enough in order to get an exemption.
 
Old 09-12-2019, 08:17 AM
 
6,835 posts, read 4,740,185 times
Reputation: 13550
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri View Post
I think your post perfectly illustrates the point. You were advised by your doctor, after a your child suffered an adverse reaction to not vaccinate her further. You sought a personal exemption. If you lived in CA, you would have sought out a ME after they eliminated Personal and religious exemptions. Under the new law, your child would be denied any exemption and youíd be faced with either vaccinating her and potentially injuring her int he process due to past bad reactions or homeschooling. It seems really messed up that you would have to make that kind of choice and that your doctorís advice would not be good enough in order to get an exemption.
How do you know Karaís daughter would be denied an exemption? Doesnít that depend on the nature of her reaction to her first dose of the vaccine and whether or not it disqualified her for further doses of that specific vaccine?
 
Old 09-12-2019, 08:19 AM
 
10,092 posts, read 6,019,443 times
Reputation: 9974
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNC4Me View Post
How do you know Karaís daughter would be denied an exemption? Doesnít that depend on the nature of her reaction to her first dose of the vaccine and whether or not it disqualified her for further doses of that specific vaccine?
Iíve read previous posts by Kara about this. Her daughterís reaction was not anaphylaxis or encephalitis. It would not fit the narrow criteria set forth in this new law from what I recall but hopefully Kara can respond to your query.
 
Old 09-12-2019, 08:24 AM
 
10,092 posts, read 6,019,443 times
Reputation: 9974
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtovenice View Post
If you were given a drug that almost killed you, you'd have no problem giving it to your own child? Wouldn't mention it all to your doctor? Have zero concerns?

Really?
Or if oneís first child got encephalitis or almost died after getting a vaccine would the people who support this law line up with their second child with a smile on their face and get that child who shares genetics with he first the same vaccine for child #2?
 
Old 09-12-2019, 08:24 AM
Status: "Fall is Here!" (set 21 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,774 posts, read 103,967,405 times
Reputation: 33535
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri View Post
Interesting perspective from a California pediatric intensive care nurse on this legislation.



https://californiaglobe.com/section-...professionals/
The nurse could have reported these AEs to VAERS herself. She could do so anonymously. As far as inserts, most list adverse events WITHOUT REGARDS TO CAUSALITY.

Interestingly, I have given many, many vaccines in my career. The office where I worked gave about 100 doses of vaccine a day. The health departments where I worked also gave many, many vaccines. In my entire career, I saw exactly TWO serious adverse reactions; one an arthus reaction in an adult to a tetanus dose, and one a kid who was sneezing uncontrollably (until he was treated) after a chickenpox vaccine. He was treated in the office with Benadryl and was fine. And I have way more than her 13 years of vaccine experience. What an appeal to authority!
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
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 · 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