Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
I agree with Fisher. I hope that the people opposing it fight back and don't lose steam.
|
Fisher is convinced vaccines caused her child to be autistic. She has made a career out of insisting vaccines cause autism. They do not, but if she admits that, she's out of a job.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Geek
Don't forget about the black market for proof of vaccination. There's plenty of ways to forge documents and I'm sure some people in the medical profession will take advantage of the situation to provide proof to parents who want to send their kids to school but not get the vaccinations.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
I could see that happening. People lie about their addresses in order to get into better schools outside of their district so I don't see why people wouldn't lie about vaccination status to retain their right to choose as well as their right to access public education.
|
We already know that people who do not vaccinate feel no ethical obligation to reduce the risk of harm to others, so such behavior would not be surprising, would it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead
You are correct, and the new mandate for adults will further force the question, what justifies the right to force vaccination in this country without epidemic? Fear of an epidemic is not written into the law. There will be legal fights ongoing about this in the future. Quite frankly I believe they just struck while the iron was hot to enforce mandates after the Disney outbreak. It wasn't even a serious outbreak, we've had worse in the past. People tend to let fear dominate their decisions though and therefore these moves work well in America.
|
The idea is to prevent epidemics, not wait until they happen, and the increasing number of outbreaks due to declining vaccination rates justifies mandates to get the rates back up again.
Fear is the only thing anti-vaccinationists have. They do not have any facts to support not vaccinating. None.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead
I'm glad everything worked out ok with you. Febrile seizures generally do not cause brain damage unless they last for a prolonged period of time and the child is not getting enough oxygen, then they do.
It was nice you had the option to space out your vaccinations. Some people want that right as well, some want the right to eliminate one they think caused the problem. This is why a choice made with your doctor as you had, not a mandate is preferred. My son has Tourettes, for two years they thought he was having seizures so we opted to hold off vaccinations. When he was finally diagnosed with Tourettes we started his vaccinations again. He had many before, and now he has finished them for his grade level.
I think parents make the best choices for their kids, and I don't believe the government should be allowed to dictate our schedules, or reasons why we chose not to. I'm not anti vax, I'm anti mandates. Now that adults will also have their own mandates if the new sb law passes, we will see how it all unfolds. I know a lot of adults who don't get yearly flu vaccines, or childhood boosters. I'm pretty sure if the childhood one passed the adult one will pass or that would be strange. I'm going back to AZ where I have more choices and less government.  |
Arizona:
Hundreds of Arizona schools skirting vaccination rule
Don't be too eager to move.
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj
If his data was fixed, fraudulant, and/or made up... why was his "partner in crime" or research partner exonerated? Did Dr. Wakefield do it all himself. What was the study about?
|
The original article had multiple authors; ten of them withdrew their support of the paper years before it was withdrawn by the
Lancet. As you have been told, the colleague who was "exonerated" was able to show he was misled by Wakefield.
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj
My point was that without 100% guarantee of safety, this medical procedure should be optional. You choose to have it or not.
If you went into the doctor and they gave you two treatment options then that is choice. I have two treatment options for infectious diseases... why am I not able to choose?
|
Choose to not vaccinate. That choice is preserved. You cannot send your child to public school in California if you do not. Cheer up, though. In Australia not vaccinating will cost you cold, hard cash.
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj
Inarguable how? The medical care we have now and even alternative medicine can make a case of measles look insignificant.
|
Please show us how any treatment can make a case of measles look insignificant. We can help relieve symptoms. With intensive care we can save some lives. But viral diseases cannot be cured. They just have to run their courses, and some will cause complications and deaths.
Quote:
Same with vaccines... right? So the people who report adverse reactions to vaccines... like screaming infants (with brain inflammation undiagnosed because that is "normal" with vaccines).
But vaccines aren't drugs... drugs treat things. Vaccines are given to healthy people.
|
You are more likely to get "brain inflammation" from the disease than from the vaccine: 2 in 1000 from the disease, at most 1 in a million from the vaccine.
MMR Decision Aid - Comparing the risks - Measles - NCIRS - National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance
Quote:
|
I've posted the CDC assessment of the types of small pox. 90% of which is pretty harmless
|
I know others have challenged this, but to quote the late, great Lewis Grizzard, "D****, brother! I don't believe I'd a told that!"
It does not make you sound smart.
Quote:
|
Are you saying that vaccines protect? I think they don't... considering that vaccinated people get the disease.
|
If exposed, most vaccinated people do not get the disease. If exposed, most unvaccinated people do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevek64
And why some of us question the true intent of passing some of these laws, especially in CA where I understand the vaccination rate was high to begin with, while other laws to protect a far greater number of people from far greater health issues/risk is neglected.
|
The state wide vaccination rate is not the issue. The concern is that people who refuse to vaccinate like to live near others who refuse to vaccinate. That increases the risks of larger outbreaks.
If other issues need to be addressed, they need to be addressed. That is no reason to ignore the risks that clusters of unvaccinated people present.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevek64
In a utopian society, yes, everyone will think of everybody else in each and every decision they make and be considerate. But unfortunately, that's not reality. It's a fine line to draw between people's decisions, not matter how stupid/selfish they are, and letting people make those choices without the big hand of gov controlling those decisions.
|
Most of the decisions people make affect only themselves. Vaccination is not one of those, and mandates can help increase vaccination rates. Other problems are irrelevant to vaccines. We need to tackle those, too, but their existence does not have anything to do with vaccination.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead
Yet, they would sign something that says you have to take it or you can't go to school. Even while knowing someone is going to have a reaction that could be fatal. It's worth it. That is what you are saying. It's worth the injuries that will occur to save the public from an outbreak. Better your child than mine. These doctors are willing to throw a few under the bus because of our history of epidemic. Key word, history.
|
The risk of a fatal reaction to a vaccine is so low it is virtually impossible to measure it. That is why saying "knowing someone is going to have a reaction that could be fatal" is a crock full of you know what. People definitely die from vaccine preventable diseases, though.
Quote:
I don't think the parents who's child suffers the severe injury would agree their child was worth the sacrifice. I think if they felt coerced into getting a vaccine they would not have gotten so that their kid could stay in school that they will feel it was worth it. Especially if their child is one of the statistics who die from the reaction.
But they do. They think it's worth it. Maybe when they start putting faces to those percentages they'll get the picture. Or maybe they'll just ease your mind by saying you can't prove it.
|
The probability of a child dying from a vaccine is tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny. You will find many parents of children who died from vaccine preventable diseases who will say they wish they had vaccinated, though.
Quote:
|
We have enough volunteers who vaccinate to prevent an epidemic already so the majority of illness and death in the up and coming years will be from the vaccine injuries themselves, not disease. People will say it's worth it because long ago more people died from epidemics. But, more people don't die today from these diseases than those who die from vaccine reactions and trying to say they can't link anything to the vaccine even though those injuries and deaths are awarded by vaccine panels is ridiculous. People don't give money for nothing.
|
We are on the verge of not having enough people vaccinated to prevent epidemics. That is the whole point of mandates: to stop the declining vaccination rates that will allow a resurgence of vaccine preventable diseases.
No one denies that vaccine injuries exist. They do, just not in the numbers you are trying to make us believe.
The compensation program does provide awards for true vaccine injuries. It even provides compensation to some people whose injuries may have been caused by something other than the vaccine, since a claimant does not have to prove the vaccine caused the injury, only that it
might have.
Quote:
What are the numbers of the injured reported yearly from vaccine reactions in America today?
Reports are not the issue. The issue is how many reports turn out to represent true injuries. That number is a small fraction of the total reports.
What are the number of people who die from these diseases in America?
|
The number is small due to the fact that most people vaccinate. Stop vaccinating, and more people will die.
Quote:
|
Let's compare to see if their injuries and death are worth it. I'd like to see the evidence proving they didn't. Vaccine inserts claim that they do and give warnings. It should be easy for you to find because there is so much information out there by good scientist for parents to read.
|
You have already been told that many side effects listed in package inserts are there whether the vaccine caused them or not. True, known adverse effects are listed and also discussed in the vaccine information statement given to anyone who takes a vaccine.
Te actual number of severe injuries truly caused by vaccines is so small it's hard to calculate.
Quote:
|
And if we don't have the science to prove if a vaccine caused an injury or not, when a child is healthy one day, gets the vaccine and is dead the next day, why the hell would we base our children's education on getting one? Saying something is safe, or didn't cause injury is different than saying we can't prove if it did or did not so there's no point. Or better yet, you can't prove if it did or not so until you as a layman can don't assume causation just because your child was fine yesterday before the vaccine.
|
The only vaccine injury that could cause sudden death is an allergic reaction. Most severe allergic reactions are successfully treated and are not fatal.
Your argument is so circuitous I get dizzy looking at it. Is it possible your child could have a severe reaction to a vaccine? Yes. Is it probable? No. It is very highly improbable, and much less probable than having a dangerous complication from a vaccine preventable disease.
Quote:
|
Maybe we should wait until the science is better and we can determine if the vaccine causes these injuries and deaths we award. I think it's important since these government workers and doctors agree that a child's public educational rights can be removed without them.
|
We could prove that some of the injuries for which awards were made are not due to the vaccine, if we demanded proof from claimants? Is that what you want? For Guillain Barre syndrome, for example, the illness has only to fall within a certain time frame after the vaccination for an award to be made. In many people, the GBS very likely was related to an infection, not the vaccine. Do you want a claimant to have to prove he did not have GBS due to a Campylobacter infection?
Quote:
From 2006 to 2014, over 2.5 billion doses of covered vaccines were distributed in the U.S. according to
the CDC. 2,975 claims were adjudicated by the Court for claims filed in this time period and of those
1,876 were compensated. This means for every 1 million doses of vaccine that were distributed, 1 individual was compensated.
|
Thanks for showing just how rare serious injuries due to vaccines are, especially when you realize some injuries were compensated that were not even due to the vaccine. The risk of a compensable injury - some of which resolved without any permanent harm - was one in a million doses.
Quote:
|
So they can't prove any of them? They just pay out to save time and money? Are there so many who claim injury that they don't have time to look into it? And if so why? I have a hard time believing over 27 years and 16,038 claims none of them can be proven by a professional. That isn't a very good record.
|
No, that does not mean they cannot prove any of them. It means they did not have to.
Quote:
Merck has had quite the reputation for putting out drugs that cause injury. Some pulled off the shelf for it for being rushed to market before all trials were finished. Yet when it comes to vaccines their record is fantastic?  These are the claims that are difficult to believe. That's why mandates shouldn't be granted. Until we have the science and transparency to guarantee safety, nobody should be threatened with taking their right to a public education or a job away from them if they don't get a vaccine that's mandated. Unless they are saying it's worth those injuries. That's unethical to claim in my opinion.
It reminds me of a child hiding, if you can't find me then I didn't do it, you can't prove I did. But they aren't children, they are professionals we rely on to do their jobs well. Transparency and competence would be more appreciated for those of us who aren't anti vax, just normal parents wanting some real data by those great scientist you keep talking about. Not the same old, you can't prove it did or didn't routine we get over and over again. That hardly qualifies as competent. That's why their are so many sites with people guessing what happened to the injured. People are searching for answers since we can't find any.
I'll wait for all the proof you have................
|
The first rotavirus vaccine was pulled off the market because the association with intussusception was felt to be causal. Better vaccines were developed. Isn't that what you want: better vaccines? The problem is that in your view no vaccine will ever be good enough. Expecting a vaccine to be 100% safe is unrealistic. That's like insisting no automobiles should be produced until they are all 100% reliable and never break down.
The proven safety of vaccines is so great that we can ethically mandate vaccination.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo48
Measles are ERADICATED from the US in 2000? Not according to the WHO.
|
In epidemiology,
eliminated and
eradicated are different concepts.
Eliminated means the disease no longer circulates in a location. In the US, that has been achieved. All measles cases happen because someone brings it in from another country.
Eradicated means it's gone worldwide. So far two viruses have been eradicated: smallpox and rinderpest (which affected ruminants, especially cattle). The eradication of polio is within reach.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead
I don't think those with a religious opposition care if they are donated or purchased. I don't think they care how much or how little they are used as long as they are or have been used.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
I think the elimination of religious exemptions makes this law a lot worse then it would be if they just eliminated philosophical exemptions. Even though I think everyone should have the right to choose, it's especially wrong to force people to go against their religion.
|
Religious objections are in essence philosophical objections. None of the major religions in this country have strict prohibitions against vaccines. As your link shows, even the Catholic Church feels that the benefits of vaccines make it ethical to use them.
We have seen that people lie about religious exemptions, and those with religious objections do vaccinate when the disease gets up close and personal in their communities.
Sorry, but if the doctrine of the church you attend does not forbid vaccination, I do not believe you can claim to have a religious objection to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
lol! There are known neurotoxins in vaccines, Suzy. All one has to do is read the list of ingredients to know that. No need for some spinning links. Aluminum for example is a known neurotoxin. Duh!
|
The amount of aluminum in vaccines is not toxic. You get more from food and water every day than from all the vaccines an individual will ever take. And no, getting it in a shot makes no difference. The same with all the other vaccine ingredients that ant-vaccinationists rail against, including formaldehyde.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead
Readers
Yes but even natural doctors worry about their licenses. They feel coerced into compliance as well.
|
"Natural" doctors get into trouble when they do things that hurt people. Do you really want them to be able to hurt people? as long as they do no harm, they are pretty well allowed to go their merry way. The fact that much of what they do is useless is just fine. As long as people want to pay for worthless "detoxification" they may do so.
Quote:
Then there’s the all-too-typical case of Mark Geier, MD, a critic of using Thimerosal (a form of mercury) in vaccines, especially for children. His criticisms and revelations became a major thorn in the side of vaccine companies. In April of this year, he received a letter telling him that a secret hearing had been held by the Maryland Board of Physicians, and they had decided that he was “a danger to the public.” Because of that his license was being immediately suspended. At a hearing in May, neither Dr. Geier nor his attorney were allowed to examine any of the state’s witnesses (the state refuses to release their names), nor would they be allowed to produce any witnesses or testimony of their own. In fact, at no time before either of the hearings would the Maryland Board of Physicians tell Dr. Geier precisely what he had been accused of. The case is ongoing.
It's hard for these doctors when they really DO feel it could be harmful to the child much less willing to lie about it. Parents may try to do it.
|
Geier lost his license in multiple states, primarily because he was treating kids with autism with Lupron. He was doing harm.
Harpocrates Speaks: Mark Geier: Not a Leg to Stand On
"Dr. Geier, through his Institute of Chronic Illness and Genetic Centers of America, misdiagnosed autistic children with precocious puberty so he could claim that he was using Lupron on label, rather than for an unapproved, experimental indication (i.e., autism). This also allowed him to bill insurance companies for the lupron. His actions got him into hot water with various state medical boards, starting with his medical license in Maryland being suspended on April 27, 2011. Since then, one by one, 11 of his 12 medical licenses were suspended, an application for a thirteenth license in Ohio was denied, and some of those suspensions became complete revocations. The last actions I wrote about were the revocation of his license in Missouri and suspension of his Illinois license. At the time, the only state left in which Dr. Geier could practice was Hawaii.
As of April 11, 2013, that is no longer the case.
Although his license listing on the Hawaii state Professional and Vocational Licensing search has yet to be updated as of this writing, searching the state's RICO Complaint History database reveals that the board revoked his license last month. The case number is MED 2011-79-L (if the link to the PDF doesn't work, go to the OAH Decisions web site, click on OAH Final Orders and search for "Geier"). According to the Final Order, a petition for disciplinary action against Dr. Geier was filed on July 17, 2012, Geier was notified on November 19, and a hearing was held on February 5 of this year.
Dr. Geier failed to appear for the hearing and did not file for exceptions or extensions to delay the hearing."
Geier did get his day in court in Maryland:
http://www.casewatch.org/board/med/g...revocation.pdf
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo48
HIPPA prevents that. A school can say there is an outbreak, but they are forbidden under HIPPA to list names, or name the kids in the school who are unvaccinated.
Even in California, they will not be able name the students who are unvaccinated because of medical reasons. That is private information.
|
HIP
AA does not apply to schools. Other laws do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by purehuman
If you've vaccinated your child why would you worry anyways. The vaccine works right???or maybe it doesn't. It's preposterous that anyone would believe that their vaccinated child is in danger from a child who isn't...I see it as an unconscious acceptance that vaccines don't work.
The absurd and malicious lies that only one in a million have severe reactions to vaccines is disgraceful.
|
Vaccines have small failure rates. They protect all but a few who get them. Ninety percent of those who are not vaccinated will get measles if exposed; only 5% of vaccinated people will. That means an unvaccinated child is more likely to catch measles and expose someone else, including the five percent of vaccinated people for whom the vaccine did not work, babies too young to be vaccinated, and people with compromised immune systems.
Quote:
In great britain the polio epidemic had peaked in 1950 and declined 82% before the vaccine was introduced in 1956.
European countries that refused vaccination saw the epidemics end just as those countries that vaccinated did.
In 1976 a swine flu "pandemic" (experts estimated it could infect 50-60 thousand people) never unfolded.
After mass vaccinations began (25% of pop was vaccinated) the program was halted after just 10 weeks. Why??? because more than 500 people developed guillain barre syndrome and 25 of them died.
Ultimately only 200 cases of swine flu were reported by CDC that year in the U.S.A with one death.
The first measles vaccine was available in U.S in 1968. The infection and death rate from this common childhood disease had already improved significantly over the previous century because of improved sanitation, healthy food, clean water and warm homes.
After 1968 (when measles vaccine was introduced) the death rate did not change.
The alarming rise in autism coincides with the increasing number of vaccines.
How many adults would go in for 4 shots at once?...and then again after a couple months, and then again, and again, and again.......especially if (like infants) their immune system is not fully developed.
How many adults would go in for even 2 shots at once.
|
Wow! Great job of packing multiple vaccine myths into one paragraph! See #1, 5, and 12 here:
Myths That Keep People From Vaccinating Their Kids
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo48
Yes, it does. If a parent has no right of informed consent for medical treatment for their children, it opens the door to no right of informed consent for medical treatment for the adults themselves.
|
Informed consent has nothing to do with mandates. It is part of the process for everyone who vaccinates. This has been explained for you before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by purehuman
You're absolutely right...a LOT of neurotoxins.
aluminum has 84 times the capacity to cause agglomeration (sludging) as does sodium.
We use it in anti-perspirants since they cause "sludging", blocking of the perspiration ducts in armpits.
This same sludging is is achieved in human tissue blood flow from vaccinations with aluminum.
Aluminum, mercury,squalene, and other contaminants added to vaccines are equivalent to (or worse) than viruses and bacteria relative to causing damage to human tissue.
They are foreign substances in human physiology that induce electrostatic and immunological responses, both of which derails blood flow, and causing direct tissue damages in their own right.
Vaccines should be banned.
They are ALL causing ischemic brain and body damages and chronic illness and disease.
Literally BILLIONS has been paid out to vaccine damaged people, from a fund paid into by the taxpayers.
Vaccine makers and those who dispense them are exempt from prosecution.
The CDC and WHO are being controlled by the very groups that profit from selling us sickness and disease.
|
Another myth and a conspiracy theory to top it off!
See #46.
Myths That Keep People From Vaccinating Their Kids
There is no squalene in any vaccine sold in the US. It is used in a flu vaccine available in Europe, but there have been no injuries attributable to it.
Shattering the Myths About Squalene in Vaccines | WIRED
Don't lick your fingers, though. There is
natural squalene on them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo48
I posted the link in a previous post to all the ingredients in every single vaccination and by Manufacturer. This is from the CDC's own site. There is one vaccine that contains fetal lung tissue. I don't remember which, but you can search it.
|
See #11 and 46:
Myths That Keep People From Vaccinating Their Kids
There is no fetal tissue in any vaccine.
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.
