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, 09:05 AM
 
8,354 posts, read 2,464,364 times
Reputation: 9724

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffrow1 View Post
Of course not, you all support OTHER people vaccinating their kids. You know that vaccines work and you want everyone else to assume rare risk of a serious complication. If everyone else provides the herd immunity you are perfectly willing to roll with it. Why should you take the risk if the rest of society assumes it.
She's not up for forcing ANYONE to get it.

Personally, I don't care if NO ONE gets it. It's a choice. And I am not hiding behind anyone else's decisions.

 
Old 09-12-2019, 09:10 AM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
1,523 posts, read 1,459,409 times
Reputation: 1054
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtovenice View Post
She's not up for forcing ANYONE to get it.

Personally, I don't care if NO ONE gets it. It's a choice. And I am not hiding behind anyone else's decisions.
And that's why you are provided nothing to this discussion. Just lobbing bombs.
 
Old 09-12-2019, 09:14 AM
 
8,354 posts, read 2,464,364 times
Reputation: 9724
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffrow1 View Post
And that's why you are provided nothing to this discussion. Just lobbing bombs.
Your comment is that people who don't vaccine want others to vaccine so that the unvaccinated can 'hide' behind herd immunity.

I addressed YOUR comment. So I guess you don't want to discuss your own comments? Just throw the first bomb and run?

t
r
o
l
l
 
Old 09-12-2019, 09:17 AM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
23,883 posts, read 29,029,280 times
Reputation: 29712
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.
Yes, no one who is sick should even enter a hospital except to get medical care for himself. Pertussis could kill a newborn. Don't want to take the vaccine? Then stay out of hospitals, including NICUs. You could be infectious before you have symptoms.

If your child had a documented adverse reaction to a vaccine then she would have a legitimate medical reason to get no more doses of that vaccine or any other with any of the same ingredients. There would not be a reason to forgo other vaccines with none of the same ingredients. To just say no more vaccines, period, is like saying you do not want your child ever to have any antibiotic because she had an adverse reaction to one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri View Post
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.
Please answer my question: Why is being able to prevent more serious infections a Bad Thing?

No, the number of vaccines is not "too much."

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 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.
If her daughter had a known adverse reaction to a vaccine she would qualify for a medical exemption for that vaccine and any vaccine with the same ingredients.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri View Post
Would you support children of today being vaccinated on the same schedule that there parents were?

You seem to support coercion which is not free choice.
No, I would not. Every vaccine prevents a serious disease which can maim or kill.

Quote:
Originally Posted by newtovenice View Post
That's because vaccines don't have adverse reactions. It was something else that caused it. Always. Especially if it happens more than 15 minutes after you leave the dr office. It's never the vaccine then. Because well you left the office. So it's not the vaccines fault.

If you dismiss it before you examine it, it never happened. Easy peasy way to ensure vaccine data shows they are 100% "safe."
Who here has claimed that vaccines do not have adverse reactions? Please link to the post(s).

Quote:
Originally Posted by newtovenice View Post
So you advise anyone who has a potentially deadly reaction to a drug to give that drug to their young child?
Would anyone who has had a potentially deadly reaction to shrimp let her child eat shrimp?

Would anyone who has had a potentially deadly reaction to penicillin let her child take penicillin?
 
Old 09-12-2019, 09:26 AM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
1,523 posts, read 1,459,409 times
Reputation: 1054
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtovenice View Post
Your comment is that people who don't vaccine want others to vaccine so that the unvaccinated can 'hide' behind herd immunity.

I addressed YOUR comment. So I guess you don't want to discuss your own comments? Just throw the first bomb and run?

t
r
o
l
l
Predictable response.

You can bet that if no one vaccinated and polio, mumps, measles and other preventable diseases were running rampant that those same "choice" parents would be lining up for vaccines. They certainly are making a conscious decision to let others to carry the load.
 
Old 09-12-2019, 09:28 AM
 
6,835 posts, read 4,740,185 times
Reputation: 13550
Is California only the 3rd state to do away with waivers other than medical? I know there are some that do both religious and personal and some that do one or the other, but for some reason I had 5 with medical only stuck in my head.

Are there any other states people are aware of with legislation pending to end all but medical waivers? I’d be interested to see which way the country is leaning on this issue.
 
Old 09-12-2019, 09:32 AM
 
6,835 posts, read 4,740,185 times
Reputation: 13550
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffrow1 View Post
Predictable response.

You can bet that if no one vaccinated and polio, mumps, measles and other preventable diseases were running rampant that those same "choice" parents would be lining up for vaccines. They certainly are making a conscious decision to let others to carry the load.
When the measles outbreak hit Michigan, the health department in the county effected administered an exponentially higher number of MMR vaccines than they did in the same time frame the previous year.

When a disease becomes a reality instead of just a faint possibility, parents make very different decisions.

Last edited by UNC4Me; 09-12-2019 at 09:42 AM..
 
Old 09-12-2019, 09:33 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 UNC4Me View Post
Is California only the 3rd state to do away with waivers other than medical? I know there are some that do both religious and personal and some that do one or the other, but for some reason I had 5 with medical only stuck in my head.

Are there any other states people are aware of with legislation pending to end all but medical waivers? I’d be interested to see which way the country is leaning on this issue.
California is the third state. New York has since followed suit, and Maine passed a law that goes into effect in 2020. I believe Washington State removed non-medical exemptions from MMR only.
 
Old 09-12-2019, 09:34 AM
 
2,767 posts, read 738,834 times
Reputation: 2819
The World Health Organization has named vaccine hesitancy as one of the top threats to global health in 2019. This thread started out as a criticism of California's recent legislation (regarding validating medical exemptions). Legislation that will actually protect all children and will especially benefit the very vulnerable few who do indeed have medical reasons that prohibit them from being immunized.

What is puzzling is the insistence of some posters who continue to deny this beneficial legislation with arguments that seem more like trying to get folks to jeopardize our children's health and safety, and that of the general public's, rather than concern for those who do have valid medical contraindications to vaccines and therefore cannot be immunized. These weed filled arguments can be dangerous to individual precious babies and children, as well as detrimental to the overall Public Health, as they seem more like phony anti-vaccination talking points rather than concern for the Public Health of California, the USA , the Earth and the medically compromised child.

Children who genuinely need a medical exemption, and are not vaccinated, can’t attend a school if their school is not safe due to the percentages of non-vaccinated students who pose a dangerous risk to everyone. California is acting in the best interests of all children by enacting safety measures that will curtail the proliferation of bogus medical exemptions.

States mandate childhood vaccines for enrollment in our schools because all children should have the opportunity to be educated in a safe and healthy environment. A twisted concept of parental personal liberty should not risk the health and safety of millions of schoolchildren. Cancers that are preventable should be prevented. Viruses that are preventable should be eradicated. And the safety and efficacy of vaccines are no longer subject to serious debate. They work, and our public health officials must make sure more of our citizens are immunized against preventable and communicable diseases.

Refusing vaccination for reasons other than a serious medical condition is unfair and dangerous but it definitely remains a personal parental choice. Those parents who choose to place their children at risk to preventable serious illnesses and suffering certainly have that right, but they do not have the right to place anyone else's child in jeopardy with phony medical exemptions.

The elimination of the personal belief exemptions and verifying the validity of medical exemptions will prevent suffering and save lives. It is the right thing to do, and medical exemption in California is what this thread was about as the OP has frequently reminded posters.

To any parent on this thread who may be vaccine hesitant, and there are a few posters who do seem terribly fearful, please remember when it comes to providing accurate medical information, social media is a hot mess filled with anti-vaxxers with agendas, and referring to credible medical sources may be more reassuring than any of us presenting the science based information here. Your best reference for unbiased factual information: your pediatrician or any of the highly respected medical organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatricians, the AMA, the NIH or the CDC. These sources have children's best interests as their mission.

We are experiencing rising outbreaks of eliminated diseases like measles, and the World Health Organization has named vaccine hesitancy as one of the top threats to global health in 2019. This mother, grandmother, unabashed lover of babies and former R.N. begs "anyone still on the fence" to obtain information wisely as you decide.

Once again, the safety and efficacy of vaccines are no longer subject to serious debate. They work, and our public health officials are doing the job we the public demand: Protecting the Public Health.

Be aware of online “echo chambers” which suck in concerned parents with anti-vaxx material. Many of these echo chambers have hundreds of thousands of followers and much of the blame can be placed on profiteers: those who seek to exploit the ignorance and fears of parents and others for financial gain. They sell their own books and alternative lifestyles and bankroll themselves from GoFundMe campaigns. Any dissenting voice is a threat to their finances, so they encourage intense groupthink and mob mentality. Vaccine misinformation and disinformation is a profitable online business with fatal consequences, so choose your information wisely. You know, as if your child's life depended upon it, because it does.

Last edited by corpgypsy; 09-12-2019 at 10:50 AM.. Reason: clarity
 
Old 09-12-2019, 09:38 AM
 
4,224 posts, read 2,920,143 times
Reputation: 8122
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNC4Me View Post
How do you know Kara’s daughter would be denied an exemption? Doesn’t 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?
Her reaction did not fit the guidelines that are in place today. However, it was terrifying to me and I was in contact with the doctor that night and took her to the office in the morning.

Also, in my previous post when I spoke about unvaccinated people not carrying the diseases, I meant children as well. So what if your child sits next to an unvaccinated child in school? Or sleeps over at their house?
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